Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 in 2018 with funding from 
 Getty Research Institute 
 
 https://archive.org/details/historyantiquiti00brit_10 
 
THE 
 
 HISTORY AND ANTIQUITIES 
 
 OF THE 
 
 SEE AND CATHEDRAL CHURCH 
 
 ILLUSTRATED WITH 
 
 A SERIES OF ENGRAVINGS, 
 
 OF 
 
 ^Rfos, 0kbations, Pans, anil details of tfje gtrcfutecturc of tfiat <&iftfic£: 
 
 INCLUDING 
 
 BIOGRAPHICAL ANECDOTES OF THE BISHOPS, 
 
 AND OF 
 
 OTHER EMINENT PERSONS CONNECTED WITH THE CHURCH. 
 
 BY 
 
 JOHN BRITTON, F.S.A. 
 
 Edition: 
 
 PRINTED FOR, AND PUBLISHED BY, LONGMAN, HURST, REES, ORME, AND BROWN, 
 
 PATERNOSTER ROW ; 
 
 THE AUTHOR, 10, TAVISTOCK PLACE; AND J. TAYLOR, 59, HIGH HOLBORN. 
 
 1816 . 
 

2 To 
 
 3Joi)tt a&oj Mcpton, @sn, architect, ana ;jp. g, a. 
 
 •J)n testimony of long established Jprtendshtfh 
 
 ana as 
 
 A public Admofoledgment of repeated Acts of Hi'ndness, 
 
 tm tf)G loan of 
 
 Draftings of ancient Architecture, 
 
 ana 
 
 SjiJarltcularlg for some uset) in the present J&olume, 
 
 tl)is "account of 
 
 i&orfonci) Catf^&ral <£$ttrcf), 
 
 is fnscrtfca tn> 
 
 .fttaicf), 1816 . 
 
 €&e autfjot. 
 

 
PREFACE. 
 
 Sanguine expectations are very frequently terminated by mortify¬ 
 ing disappointment; but nothing of originality, difficulty, or im¬ 
 portance would ever be undertaken, were not the mind of man 
 impelled by some degree of enthusiasm. The common and beaten 
 track of life is easily pursued, but to scale the pathless mountain, 
 or explore the devious forest, is only to be effected by the cou¬ 
 rageous and enterprising traveller. Should he not make any es¬ 
 sential discoveries, he will obtain that satisfaction which can only 
 be derived from ocular demonstration. Shakspeare justly and 
 appositely, on this as on every other subject that emanates from 
 him, says— 
 
 “ The ample proposition that hope makes 
 In all designs begun on earth below, 
 
 Fails in the promised largeness ; checks and disasters 
 Grow in the veins of actions highest rear’d.” 
 
 Troilus and Cressida. 
 
 Without arrogating any unusual degree of enthusiasm or cou¬ 
 rage, the author of the present volume is certainly anxious to pro¬ 
 duce a respectable, handsome, and interesting work ; one calculated 
 to please the eye, and afford some instruction and delight to the 
 mind. He would gladly give full satisfaction to the most fastidious 
 critic; but continually finds obstacles in his way, and difficulties to 
 thwart his best intentions. Thus circumstanced he entreats in¬ 
 dulgence from the profound antiquary and artist, assuring them he 
 will thankfully avail himself of every liberal and judicious hint, and 
 will continue to exert himself in improving every department of 
 the work, to the extent of his knowledge and means. 
 
 b 
 
11 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 Unlike the local ciceroni, and the provincial antiquary, who direct 
 all their attention and admiration to a single edifice, and who 
 thereby imperceptibly acquire an indiscriminating prejudice in 
 favour of such subject, it is the good fortune of the author of the 
 present volume to have no predilection or partiality for any one 
 cathedral; and to be actuated in his researches and descriptions 
 by the sole motive of ascertaining truth, of furnishing correct in¬ 
 formation, and conveying impartial opinions. It is a common, but 
 weak practice, with persons connected with a particular cathedral, 
 or even resident in one city, to be extravagantly partial to their 
 own edifice, to speak of its beauties and grandeur in exaggerated 
 terms, and to depreciate the more eminent features, or magnitude 
 of other rival churches. Thus the inhabitant of Lincoln contends 
 that the minster of that city is much superior, finer, and more 
 interesting than its northern rival at York ; whilst the inhabitant of 
 the latter city cannot recognize or admit any degree of equality. 
 To him York minster is pre-eminent, and he is quite offended with 
 the impartial antiquary who sees and points out excellencies in 
 each ; who perceives vastness in the church of York, variety in that 
 of Lincoln; who sees loftiness, occasional richness, and space in 
 the former; and solidity, picturestpie diversity,numerous elegancies, 
 and various interesting appendages to the latter. Each has its 
 merits and defects; each has beauties not possessed by the other; 
 and each has excellencies of architecture and sculpture, which are 
 unparalleled in its rival. By accurate plans, elevations, and views 
 of the two, we shall hereafter be better enabled to appreciate and 
 understand both; and from such only can a just estimate be 
 formed. 
 
 To the liberal critics, who have fairly and candidly reviewed the 
 History &c. of Salisbury Cathedral, the author returns very sincere 
 thanks, not merely for their encouraging praises, but for that ad¬ 
 vice and even censure which appear to emanate from generous and 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 Ill 
 
 disinterested motives. From such strictures he will endeavour to 
 improve his future works. The invidious anonymous critics, who, 
 angered at the success of “ The Cathedral Antiquities/' take every 
 secret opportunity to traduce it and depreciate the author, are 
 fully welcome to all the pleasure they can derive from such amusing 
 pursuits. Were they aware that their abuse is panegyric, and 
 that they are thereby conferring favours, they would seek some 
 other mode of gratifying their petty envy. 
 
 Between the Catholic and Protestant antiquary the author wishes 
 to steer a middle course: he is ready to admit the impartial reason¬ 
 ings of each ; to consider both as fallible human beings, and equally 
 liable to error and prejudice. In their doctrinal disputes he will 
 avoid interfering, for it appears to him notorious that both the 
 Protestant churchman and Catholic priest are generally hurried be¬ 
 yond the point of justice and truth by prepossession and partiality. 
 Religious as well as political controversity is too commonly con¬ 
 ducted by intemperance, and thence leads to personal animosity 
 and revenge, rather than to friendly union and peace. 
 
 In preparing the present volume for the press, the author has 
 received personal or literary favours from the following noblemen 
 and gentlemen,to whom he returns very sincere thanks:—the Earl 
 of Radnor ; the Bishop of Norwich; the Dean of Norwich; 
 John Adey Repton, Esq.; Dr. Sayers; the Rev. Dr. Sutton; 
 the Rev. James Ford; Dawson Turner, Esq.; the Rev. Henry 
 
 J.Todd; William Wilkins, Esq.;- Norgate, Esq.; Mr. Kit- 
 
 son, Jun.; Mr. Henry Basset; Mr. Geldart, Jun.; Mr. E. J. 
 Willson. 
 
 The subscribers to this work are hereby apprised that the present 
 volume contains a wood-cut for the title, and about four sheets of 
 letter-press more than has been promised. In this letter-press the 
 author has endeavoured to give a condensed and connected nar¬ 
 rative of all the principal events connected with the cathedral; has 
 
IV 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 pointed out the different styles, eras, and characteristic features of 
 the architecture of the church; and has also given a few biogra¬ 
 phical anecdotes of the different prelates. The chronological lists 
 of bishops, kings, &c., and dates of the church, it is hoped will be 
 found useful. Although all the books specified in the following 
 list have been examined, yet the author has derived the greater part 
 of the following narrative from Blomefield's “ History, &c. of Nor¬ 
 wich.” 
 
 The next volume of this work will be devoted to Winchester 
 Cathedral, which will be illustrated by thirty engravings, and 
 by about one hundred pages of letter-press. The former will be 
 from drawings by Mr. E. Blore, who has just completed a very 
 interesting, accurate, and scientific series. These will display almost 
 every portion and member of the building; and will be peculiarly 
 useful in developing a variety of styles and peculiarities of architec¬ 
 ture and ornament at different ages. 
 
 The History and Illustrations of York Cathedral will follow 
 that of Winchester, for which Mr. Blore and Mr. Mackenzie have 
 commenced a series of elaborate drawings. About thirty-six dif¬ 
 ferent views, plans, elevations, and sections will be devoted to that 
 noble fabric; and as the author expects to obtain much original 
 information from the archives of that church, he hopes to be able 
 to furnish the architectural antiquary with an interesting treat. 
 
 Tavistock Place, 
 
 AW 19,1816. 
 
i^tstorp ana ^nttquittes 
 
 OF 
 
 NORWICH CATHEDRAL CHURCH. 
 
 KINGDOM AND BISHOPRIC OF EAST-ANGLIA.-THE LATTER SUCCESSIVELY 
 
 FIXED AT DUNWICH, NORTH-ELMHAM, AND THETFORD.—BRIEF NOTICES 
 OF THE BISHOPS OF THOSE SEES, TO THE YEAR 1091. 
 
 To render the History of the See and Cathedral of Norwich explicit and 
 satisfactory, it will be necessary to advert to the geographical situation of 
 the eastern portion of the islandendeavour to ascertain the first set¬ 
 tlement of a prelate over the district, and the successive removals of the 
 see;—inquire into the state and dominion of the episcopal authority;— 
 and trace these objects through some intricate and transitory stages to the 
 permanent settlement of the Cathedral, with its members and offices, at 
 Norwich. In the course of this reflective survey, we shall find many 
 circumstances calculated to awaken both serious and consolatory reflec¬ 
 tions ; many events illustrative of the progress of civilization; and 
 some traits of human character reproachful to man, and particularly so 
 to the ministers of Christ. Opposed to such, however, we shall perceive 
 that many of the East-Anglian prelates were men of exemplary lives and 
 
G 
 
 NORWICH CATHEDRAL. 
 
 of estimable character; and that they successfully and laudably devoted 
 their time and talents to counteract the deleterious effects of Paganism, 
 and ameliorate the condition and manners of the people. 
 
 The eastern part of England, now comprised in the counties of Essex, 
 Suffolk, and Norfolk, was certainly occupied by many Christians under 
 the Anglo-Roman dynasty; and it is certain that Helena, the wife of 
 Constantius, and her son Constantine, were residents, if not natives of 
 this part of the island. 
 
 The influence and progress of the Christians at that time have been 
 canvassed with more zeal than discrimination by some of our ecclesiastical 
 historians; and the birth-place of Constantine, called the Great, has been 
 a theme of much controversy \ If the latter circumstance be not of much 
 importance, as connected with our present inquiry, the former is entitled 
 to some consideration; for the commencement of a great establishment, 
 as well as the foundation of a national edifice, are material events in the 
 history of each. Both Helena and Constantine were arduous and powerful 
 in behalf of the new religion; and the latter, after being first advanced to 
 the title of Caesar, and afterwards to the rank of Emperor, assisted the 
 Christians in repairing and building churches, and protected and encou¬ 
 raged them in prosecuting their difficult and beneficent labours. The 
 reign of this emperor constitutes an important epoch in the annals of the 
 Christian church, for he organized and gave a sort of constitution to its 
 government. He commanded councils, or assemblies of the bishops and 
 fathers, to be held at stated places and times, for the furtherance and 
 protection of Christianity. The first of these met at Nice, in Bithynia, 
 A. D. 325, to deliberate on the divinity of Christ. 
 
 Without dwelling on this remote period of ecclesiastical history, it will 
 be most accordant to the subject of our present inquiry to take a rapid 
 stride to the beginning of the seventh century. We shall find about that 
 
 1 An interesting review of this emperor’s reign and character, witli reference to the con¬ 
 troversy respecting his birth-place, is given by the eloquent Gibbon, in the second and third 
 volumes of his History of the “Decline and Fall” of the Roman Empire. 
 
SEE OF DUNWICH. 
 
 7 
 
 time the East-Anglian monarch was peculiarly favourable to the Chris¬ 
 tians 2 . During a long exile in Gaul, Sigebert, or Sigbercht, the fifth king 
 of this district, had acquired a knowledge of, and partiality for the 
 monastic institute. Soon after he was seated on the throne he invited 
 Felix, a Burgundian priest, to leave France and instruct the inhabitants 
 of East-Anglia in the mysteries and truths of the gospel. Pleased with 
 the zeal and learning of this holy man, he appointed him the first bishop 
 of a new diocess, and fixed his see at Uunmoc (Dunwich), the capital of 
 the kingdom. Aided by Fursius, a zealous monk from Ireland, the Chris¬ 
 tian doctrines were assiduously and successfully disseminated through the 
 bishopric. The monarch also is described as being more zealous in the 
 cause of religion than in that of civil polity. He caused churches to be 
 raised, monasteries to be founded, and a public school to be instituted. 
 Malmsbury states that he established seminaries of learning in different 
 places 3 , and thus enabled men, who had previously been uncivilized and 
 irreligious, “to taste the sweets of literature 4 .” After governing his king¬ 
 dom only two years, he deserted his subjects, and retired to the abbey of 
 JBedericksworth, now Bury St. Edmunds, which he had previously founded 
 
 2 The East-Anglian kingdom consisted at this time of Norfolk, Suffolk, and part of Cam¬ 
 bridgeshire; whilst Essex was under the dominion of another monarch and another bishop. 
 
 3 The object and situation of the principal, or only school that he founded, have occasioned 
 much controversy between the advocates for the priority of the two Universities. Cains (de 
 Antiq. Cant.) at one time endeavoured to trace the origin of Cambridge to Cantaber, about four 
 hundred years before the Christian era. Asser, on the other hand (Antiq. Oxon.), with more 
 zeal than truth or probability, determining to carry the antiquity of Oxford to a more remote 
 date, assigned its foundation to Brutus, <i r c. above one thousand years anterior to that period. 
 Later authors, perceiving the absurdity of these theories, referred the origin of Cambridge to 
 Sigebert, and that of Oxford to Alfred the Great; but even here they fail in proof. According 
 to Bede, the school of Sigebert was formed in imitation of one at Canterbury, in which the 
 rudiments of grammar and other sciences were taught. Smith, in his notes to Bede’s History, 
 endeavours to prove that Sigebert’s school was situated either at Seham, now Soham, or at 
 Dunwich. See Bede’s Eccles. Hist, by Smith; app. p. 721. Lingard’s “Antiquities of the 
 Anglo-Saxon Church.” 8vo. 1810. 
 
 1 “History of the Kings of England,” translated by Sharpe; p. 99, 4to. 1815. 
 
 B 
 
8 
 
 NORWICH CATHEDRAL. 
 
 and endowed 5 . In this seclusion he was not allowed to remain long in 
 peace; for Penda, the sanguinary Mercian monarch, invaded East-Anglia 
 with a formidable army, and the reigning king, Egeric, being unable to 
 repel the enemy, Sigebert was intreated to take the command of his late 
 subjects, but refusing to join again in war, he was “dragged out of his 
 retirement by main force,” and conveyed to the army. He still refused to 
 wield a sword, and went into action with only a wand in his hand. A dreadful 
 conflict ensued, A. D. 637, or according to some writers 642, and the East- 
 Anglian forces were nearly all destroyed. Both Sigebert and Egeric were 
 slain; but Felix continued to preside over the diocess, and governed it 
 about seventeen years. During his prelacy he founded a monastery at 
 Seham, or Soham, a village on the border of the isle of Ely. According 
 to Lei and and some other writers, he died, March 8, 647, and was buried 
 at Dunwich, but his remains were afterwards conveyed to, and interred at 
 Soham. Etheric, a monk of Ramsey, in the reign of King Canute, once 
 more removed the bones to his own abbey, where they were solemnly 
 enshrined. He was canonized, as the first saint of the eastern parts of 
 England. 
 
 Thomas, Boniface, and Bisus, or Bosa 6 , were successively appointed 
 bishops of this see; the last of whom was consecrated in 669. Bede 
 relates that when the bishop w r as advanced to old age he divided his 
 diocess into two parts; one of which was to embrace Suffolk, with its see 
 at Dunwich; and the other to be co-extensive with Norfolk, and to have its 
 see at North-Elmham. Eleven prelates successively presided over the 
 former, and ten over the latter; when the two diocesses were again united, 
 and the bishops see continued at Elmham. Godwin, Le Neve, Wharton, 
 
 5 Butier, io “ Lives of the Fathers,” Arc. says that Sigebert “ became a monk at Cnobersburgh, 
 now Burgh Castle in Suffolk, which monastery he had founded for St. Furseybut Yates, in his 
 “Monastic History and Antiquities of Bury,” has adduced sufficient evidence to prove that 
 Sigebert retired to that monastery. 
 
 6 In the following list of bishops two or three spellings are given to each name as they occur 
 in ancient writers and in documents. It is singular and almost unaccountable that the names 
 of public characters should be so various and often so numerous. 
 
BISHOPS THEODORED :- 962. 
 
 9 
 
 and Blomefield, have given lists of these bishops; and the latter details a 
 few events relating to each : but the names are so variously and capriciously 
 spelt, and there are such improbabilities and obscurities that it is difficult, 
 if not impracticable, to extract any thing like rational history from their 
 narrations. In a subsequent list their names will be given; but it may 
 suffice here to notice, that Bishops Humbert, of Elmham, and Were- 
 mund, of Dunwich, both dying in 870, or 871, were succeeded by W\ bred, 
 Wired, or Wibreders, who joining the two bishoprics, seated himself at 
 Elmham. Godwin, in “ Catalogue of Bishops,” and Le Neve, state that 
 in consequence of the devastations of the Danes in Norfolk and Suffolk, 
 the two sees remained without bishops for nearly one hundred years; blit 
 Wharton, with more reason, thinks there could not have been so long an 
 interregnum in the see. 
 
 BISHOPS OF NORTH-ELMHAM AFTER THE UNION OF THE SEES 7 . 
 
 1. Theodored, or Tedred, is placed by Blomefield as the first prelate 
 of the combined sees ; but Cotton, in “ Anglia Sacra.” and Le Neve, assign 
 this station to Athulf, or Adulphus, who was the third in the list, accord¬ 
 ing to Blomefield. It is stated, in the Curteys Register of Bury, that 
 Theodored was one of the witnesses of the uncorrupted state of St. 
 Edmund’s corpse, after having been interred some time; and that he washed 
 the saint’s supernatural body, clad it in new garments, and then replaced it 
 in the coffin. 
 
 2. Theodored the second, surnamed the good , was Bishop of London 
 and afterwards of Elmham, both of which dignities he is said to have held 
 at the same time, in 962. He was a great benefactor to the Abbey of 
 Bury St. Edmunds, as appears by the White Register of that monastery. In 
 this record is also contained the bishop’s will, which is a singular mixture of 
 Latin, English, and Saxon. Among other things it bequeaths ten pounds 
 to be distributed among the poor of his bishopric of London; the same 
 sum to those of “ mi Hishoperiche at Hoxne where the Bishops of 
 
 The see is often named Hulm in the Registers of Bury Abbey and in old writings. 
 
10 
 
 NORWICH CATHEDRAL. 
 
 Elmham, Thetford, and Norwich always had a palace, till the dissolution. 
 A copy of this will is given in Blomefield’s Topographical History. 
 
 3. Alhulf, Adulf, or Eadulf was reigning here in 903, as his name 
 appears in that year to King Edgar’s charter to the church of York; but 
 in 906, we find he was succeeded by 
 
 4. Ailfric, Alfric, or Alfrid, surnamed the good, who was advanced 
 from Glastonbury to this see. He confirmed King Edgar’s charter to Croy- 
 land Abbey, and was followed in 975 by 
 
 5. Athelstane, Edelstane, or Elstan, who, according to Bentham, 
 “ was eminent for his piety and goodness, and was a benefactor to the 
 Abbey of Ely. He made a convention with Abbot Brithnoth and the 
 monks of Ely, whereby he was admitted into their fraternity; and by 
 virtue thereof performed the episcopal function among them in taking the 
 professions of the monks, conferring holy orders, and all other parts of his 
 office: for this was one of the privileges enjoyed by the church of Ely, 
 always to make choice of whatever bishop they thought proper for the 
 purpose. This good bishop, as appears by his charter, purchased with his 
 own money the manor of Dringestune, and gave it to the church of Ely for 
 ever, together with the furniture of his chapel; namely, his episcopal cross, 
 his great tower of silver and gold, of twenty pounds value, one chalice and 
 paten of ten pounds, his best sacerdotal vestment, one censer of five 
 pounds, one cope for the use of the chanters, one good pall, forty manes of 
 gold, and five pounds every year towards clothing the monks:—his charter 
 concludes thus: ‘Moreover, whatever service else I can do yon, I will do; 
 that my fellowship may be the more acceptable to God and this holy church, 
 and my memory the more carefully preserved among you.’ He lived many 
 years after this, and when he died was brought hither and buried in the 
 church, according to the covenant he had made with the abbot and monks 8 .” 
 He was living in 995, but the time of his death is not recorded. 
 
 0. St. Algar, or Alegar, was chaplain and confessor to the noted 
 Archbishop Dunstan, and was advanced to this see in 1012. He was also 
 
 8 History and Antiquities of Ely Cathedral, Ac. p. 37, 4to. 1312. 
 
BISHOP ALWIN :— 1020. 
 
 11 
 
 appointed successor to Athelstane in the episcopal office at Ely. He soon 
 resigned his bishopric, and retired to the Abbey of Ely, where he continued 
 some years, and dying was buried in the old conventual church, A.D. 1021 9 . 
 
 7. Alwin, Alfwin, Ealdwin, or Elfwin who had been custos or 
 keeper of the sainted remains of Edmund, at Bury, was promoted to the 
 see of Elmham, A.D. 1020, soon after the abdication of the former bishop. 
 He presided here at a critical time; when the secular and regular clergy 
 were struggling for ascendancy. By the command of King Canute, he 
 effected a great change in the convent of Bury, by expelling the secular 
 clergy, and supplying their places with regular monks of the Benedictine 
 order. He appears indeed to have paid more attention to this monastery, 
 and to that of Ely, than to his own see; and accordingly, following the 
 example of his predecessor, soon left it, and retired to and resided as a 
 monk at Ely the rest of his days. Before he left his see he prevailed on 
 King Canute to summon a council of barons, peers, archbishops, &c. to 
 approve and ratify his proceedings at Bury. A charter was accordingly 
 granted; by which the monastery and surrounding country, two miles in 
 diameter, were declared to be exempt from the jurisdiction of the see, and 
 that the annual tribute of censum clanis, or danegelt, should be afterwards 
 appropriated to the abbot and convent. “ Other immunities and privileges 
 were also conferred by this curious and important charter 10 .” The unjust 
 partiality of Alwin, as might have been expected, produced repeated dis¬ 
 putes and jealousies between the succeeding bishops and the abbots. We 
 accordingly find them frecpiently intriguing or at open hostility with each 
 other. Towards the middle of the fourteenth century Bishop Bateman 
 made a desperate effort to remove the exemption and bring the monastery 
 and town of Bury under the dominion of the see; but having trespassed on 
 the privileges of the monks was fined by the king in the full penalty of 
 thirty talents of gold (about ten thousand pounds), which had been spe¬ 
 cified in Hardicanute’s confirmation of Canute’s charter. 
 
 9 History and Antiquities of Ely Cathedral, &c. p. 88. 
 
 10 Yates, History, &c. of Bury, vol. 1; in which is a translation of Canute’s charter. 
 
12 
 
 NORWICH CATHEDRAL. 
 
 8. Ailfric, Alfrick, or Elfric the second of that name, surnamed 
 the black, was promoted from the monastery of Bury to this diocess, and 
 died in 1038. His will is preserved in the White Register of Bury, and is 
 very similar to that of Theodored. 
 
 9. Ailfric, the third of that name, called the little, was prior of Ely, 
 and appears to have governed this diocess only one year, as his death is 
 recorded in the Pyncebek Register in 1139. The three Ailfrics are fre¬ 
 quently confounded by most authors. 
 
 10. Stigand, chaplain to Queen Emma and King Harold Harefoot, 
 succeeded to this bishopric by simony; but was ejected in 1040, by Hardi- 
 canute. 
 
 11. Grimretel, Griketel, or Grunketel was appointed in his place, 
 but remained only a very short time; for after the death of Hardicanute, 
 
 12. Stigand was again reinstated. He was made chaplain to King 
 Edward, who from paying more attention to the monks than to his sub¬ 
 jects, generally, was honoured with the title of Confessor, and afterwards 
 canonized as a saint. Stigand was however a politician as well as a priest, 
 and by his connexion with the king first obtained the union of the 
 bishopric of the South Saxons to his own, was afterwards advanced to the 
 rich see of Winchester, and next seized on the more lofty post of Canter¬ 
 bury. Both these he continued to hold at the same time ; and thus verified 
 the character afterwards given him by Godwin; who says he possessed 
 great spirit, was very illiterate, and exceedingly covetous. In the year 
 1047, he resigned this see to his brother 
 
 13. Egelmare, or Ailmar who continued to preside here till the year 
 1070, when he was solemnly expelled by a decree of a synod at Winchester, 
 and probably for no other reason but his consanguinity to Stigand, who 
 had fallen from his high dignities, and though possessed of vast hoarded 
 riches died meanly and miserably in prison. Egelmare was a married 
 bishop, and his will is recited in the Sacrists Register at Bury. After the 
 conquest of England by the Normans a complete change was made in 
 civil and ecclesiastical affairs. Whilst Norman barons and soldiers were 
 appointed to govern and possess vast lordships and districts, the govern- 
 
bishop herfast: —1070. 
 
 13 
 
 ment and revenues of the church were conferred on and committed to 
 Norman prelates, in Norfolk this was fully exemplified, for on Egelmare’s 
 deposition we find his successor soon engaged in hostility with the old 
 Saxon customs, and old establishments. 
 
 BISHOPS OF THETFORD. 
 
 1. Herfast, or Arfast, the chaplain of the new monarch, was consti¬ 
 tuted bishop of this see about Easter, 1070. Being made chancellor of Eng¬ 
 land, and in favour with the king, Herfast soon directed his attention to the 
 rich abbey of Bury, the revenues of which he endeavoured to obtain for 
 himself, and also convert its church and dwellings to his own cathedral 
 and residence. In this he was foiled by the influence and exertions of 
 Baldwin, the abbot, who, learning the bishop’s intention, proceeded to 
 Rome, conciliated the Pope, Alexander II. in his favour, and obtained 
 from his holiness a confirmation and extention of privileges for his abbey. 
 Herfast would not however easily forego his designs on the monastery. 
 Various means were tried to obtain it, and the “persuasive eloquence,” as 
 Mr. Yates expresses it, “of one hundred marks of gold” was used in vain. 
 Archdeacon Herman, a contemporary, has left a narrative of the conten¬ 
 tion between the bishop and abbot; but in the true spirit and folly of 
 the times, could not proceed in his task without introducing a marvellous 
 and absurd story. He relates that as the bishop was riding and meditating 
 on the subjection of the abbey, a branch of a tree struck his eyes and pro¬ 
 duced immediate blindness. In this state he continued some time without 
 obtaining relief; but was at last prevailed on to appeal to the Abbot of 
 Bury, and through him seek the favour of the offended St. Edmund. The 
 bishop complied ;—travelled to Bury;—approached the sacred altar;—con¬ 
 fessed his crimes and intentions against the monastery;—supplicated the 
 favour of St. Edmund ;—and then, by the aid of “ cauteries and colliriums, 
 assisted by the prayers of the brethren, in a short time he returned perfectly 
 healed; only a small obscurity remained on the pupil of one eye, as a 
 
14 
 
 NORWICH CATHEDRAL. 
 
 memorial of his audacity u .” In defiance of the papal bull and the ven¬ 
 geance of St. Edmund the bishop renewed and continued his contest for 
 several years; nor did he entirely relinquish it before the year 1081, when 
 King William convoked a council at Winchester on the subject, and issued 
 his royal charter in favour of the abbot and monks, and to the discomfiture 
 of the bishop. A translation of this curious charter is given by Mr. Yates, 
 and copies of it are cited by Dugdale and Blomefield. Failing in his 
 attempts on Bury, the bishop availed himself of the decree of Lanfranc, 
 in London, 1075, and removed his see from Elmham to Thetford, which 
 was then the most considerable town in Norfolk. This place indeed pos¬ 
 sessed a strong and spacious castle, the lofty mount, or keep and ramparts 
 of which are remaining evidences of its strength and character. Blomefield 
 states, that Arfast, assisted by Roger Bigod, then lord of the castle and 
 manor, built a cathedral church at Thetford, with a palace, or mansion 
 house, on the north side of it; and that dying in 1084, he was buried in his 
 new church, where a tomb with an epitaph were raised to his memory. 
 
 2. William Galsagus, Belfagus, or Beaufo, was nominated by the 
 king to this see on Christmas-day, 1085, and was consecrated by Lanfranc 
 the following year. Under his government the new city increased in houses 
 and inhabitants, and the good bishop actively and honourably exerted him¬ 
 self during his short reign of six years to promote the welfare and hap¬ 
 piness of his pastoral flock. Like his predecessor he was chaplain and 
 chancellor to the king, who gave and confirmed to him and his heirs above 
 thirty manors in fee, in the county of Norfolk; besides lands and rents in 
 forty towns. He appears to have acquired much property and wealth, 
 the greatest part of which he bequeathed to this see, and thereby has been 
 characterised as the most liberal benefactor to it, “from its foundation to 
 the present time.” In his time the Domesday-book was compiled by order 
 of the Norman king; and in that, at pages 143 and 148, are recorded the 
 
 11 Yates, History, &c. of Bury, p. 100; from “Regisl. Rub. Collect. Buriens,’’ p. 330, &c. 
 See also Martin’s History, &c. of Thetford; who quotes a MS. in the Bodleian Library. 
 
bishop losing:— 1091. 
 
 1-3 
 
 particulars of the lands, manors, &c. belonging to the see, and to the 
 bishop. Dying in, or about the year 1091, he was succeeded by 
 
 3. Herbert de Losing, or Lozinga, who came from Normandy in the 
 suit of William Rufus, and who purchased this bishopric for the vast sum 
 of nineteen hundred pounds 12 . He also bought, for his father, Robert de 
 Losing, the abbacy of Winchester for one thousand pounds: for which 
 simonical practices he was cited before the Pope, at Rome, in 1093,— 
 sentenced to lose his staff and ring, and commanded to build certain 
 churches and monasteries, as a penance for his youthful crimes. Hence 
 the cause of the translation of the see from Thetford to Norwich, and the 
 origin of that cathedral, the history and architecture of which we are now 
 about to elucidate. 
 
 12 Pitts, Weever, and several other writers assert that Losing was a native of Orford, in Suffolk ; 
 but Dugdale, in Mon. Angli, i, 1000—Wood, in Athen. Oxon. fo. i, 406—and Tanner, Not. 
 Mon. more correctly trace his birth to a place called Pago Oximensi, in Normandy. On his 
 monument he is said to be a native of Iliems, in Normandy. Bale, in “English Votaries,” fo. 
 44, says, “ First was he here in England, by Fryndesbyp made Abbot of Rameseye, and afterwards 
 by-shop of Thetforde by Flattery, and fat payment, in the year of our Lorde 1091, for the 
 which he is named in the chronicles to this day, the kyudelyng match of Symony, and that 
 noteth him no small doar in that feate.” 
 

 HISTORICAL NOTICES CONCERNING THE REMOVAL OF THE SEE:—FOUNDA¬ 
 TION AND BUILDING OF THE NEW CATHEDRAL:-STATE OF NORWICH AT 
 
 THAT TIME.*-ANIMOSITY BETWEEN THE JEWS AND MONKS:—BURNING 
 
 OF THE CHURCH AND MONASTERY, AND OTHER EVENTS CONNECTED WITH 
 THE SEE AND CHURCH. 
 
 Having how arrived at an era in which events relating to the architecture, to 
 the civil policy, ecclesiastical affairs, and the public customs of our ancestors 
 are rendered either positive or probable by the annalist and historian, it is 
 my intention to take a brief review of such of these as immediately apper¬ 
 tain to the Cathedral and its establishment, and defer the biographical 
 anecdotes of the bishops to the last section of the volume. Herbert, after 
 presiding at Thetford till April 9, 1094, on that day solemnly translated 
 the see to Norwich, and was consecrated in his new city by Thomas, 
 Archbishop of York 1 . As the cathedral was not yet raised, it is conjec¬ 
 tured that this ceremony was performed in the church of St. Michael, 
 Tombland, then the chief ecclesiastical edifice in Norwich, and which be¬ 
 longed to Roger Bigod, Earl of Norfolk, as proprietor of the neighbouring 
 castle. Contemplating a permanent establishment here, the bishop obtained 
 a regular transfer of that church, with its cemetery and the lands and reve¬ 
 nues belonging to it, with other adjoining property. He also purchased 
 
 1 Some writers contend that the see was not settled in Norwich till the time of Henry I; but 
 Wharton, Ang. Sacr. i. 397, from the authority of Cotton, a monk of the monastery, says on the 
 5th ides of April, 1094. Leland, in Collect, iii. 72—and Rudborne, Ang. Sacr. i. 264, refer 
 this event to 1095. 
 
FOUNDATION OF THE CATHEDRAL:- 1096. 
 
 17 
 
 of the king and citizens of Norwich a piece of meadow, called Cow-holm , 
 which extended from the castle ditches on the north-east, to the river 
 Wensum. The area and boundaries of this tract of land are particularly 
 specified in certain old writings. The bishop intending to make it the site 
 of a cathedral, palace, prebendal houses, and other ecclesiastical offices, 
 obtained a confirmation of it, both by the king and the pope, with complete 
 exemption from all temporal and spiritual jurisdiction. Thus provided 
 and guaranteed, he laid the foundation stone of the new cathedral in the 
 year 1096, and Pope Paschal soon afterwards constituted it the mother 
 church of all Norfolk and Suffolk. In the course of five years the cathe¬ 
 dral, with the palace on the north side, and monastery or priory on the 
 south side, were so far advanced that sixty monks were placed in the 
 latter 2 ; and in September 1101, the bishop signed their foundation deed. 
 Aided by these rigid disciplinarians, and assisted by Archbishop Anselm, 
 the bishop next proceeded to obtain a total revolution in the ecclesiastical 
 customs and laws of his diocess. He not only attempted to prohibit mar¬ 
 riage among the clergy, but to compel those already united in sacred, wise, 
 and amiable wedlock, to part from their wives. This naturally and reason¬ 
 ably created general opposition: the “obstinate clergy,” as Fuller remarks, 
 “would keep their wives, and resolutely defied their bishop.” Thus it 
 appears that the bond of peace and Christian harmony between the prelate 
 and his ministers was broken; and the regular monks and pastoral clergy 
 were for many years afterwards at constant hostility with each other. 
 This absurd procedure of the bishop must have been detrimental to his 
 works at Norwich; yet from the style of architecture in the greater part 
 of the cathedral, and part of the palace, we must conclude that he raised 
 nearly the whole of these edifices during his dominion. Godwin says that 
 having finished the cathedral, and endowed it “ with greate landes and 
 possessions, bookes and all other necessaries,” he next built an house for 
 
 2 Previous to this era, the officers of, or attendants on the bishop were secular-canons; but 
 these were displaced, and supplied, and the number augmented to sixty, by regular monks of 
 the Benedictine order; over whom Ingulf was nominated the first prior. The list and succes¬ 
 sion of priors will be given in a subsequent page. 
 
18 
 
 NORWICH CATHEDRAL. 
 
 himself; and afterwards erected five other churches, viz. two at Norwich, 
 one at Elmham, one at Lynn, and one at Yarmouth. Having by these 
 means, according to the customs of the age, atoned for his sins, and propi¬ 
 tiated the Deity, he resigned his see and life, July 2*2, 1119, after presiding 
 twenty-eight years. 
 
 It may be both useful and amusing to ascertain the state of Norwich 
 about the period of its being constituted a city. 
 
 In the time of Edward the Confessor, about 1006, the town contained 
 one thousand three hundred and twenty burgesses. It was divided into 
 three portions, or manors, besides the Neiv-Burgh, and belonged to as 
 many lords, or great proprietors. These were the king, the earl, and 
 Bishop Stigand. It further appears that Norwich then contained at least 
 twenty-five parochial churches, and that its number of burgesses exceeded 
 Lincoln, Ipswich, Yarmouth, Cambridge, or Canterbury. In consequence 
 of the earl's rebelling against the king, the inhabitants of the city, as well 
 as the houses, were much reduced at the time of the Domesday survey, 
 which only specifies six hundred and sixty-five burgesses in the borough, 
 and four hundred and eighty, borderers. It states that nine mansions 
 belonging to the bishop, seventeen belonging to the earl, one hundred and 
 ninety in the borough, and eighty-one in the occupation of the castle, were 
 void. By the same record it appears that King William gave Arfast, 
 Bishop of Thetford, fourteen mansions at Norwich, for the principal seat of 
 that prelate; whereby it is clear that it was in contemplation to translate the 
 see to that place long before Herbert’s time. In this survey it is stated that 
 the burgesses held forty-three chapels within the borough: and eleven 
 other chapels, or churches, are also noticed in the same record. Fifty-one 
 French burgesses are named as in the demesne of the king, in the Neic- 
 Burgh; fifty under Roger Bigot; and fourteen under Ralph de Beaufo, 
 who was probably brother to the bishop of that name. Herbert was now 
 allowed to employ one “ monetariurri ,” or mint-master in his new city. 
 
 Although we are not informed in the meagre annals of Cotton, or in any 
 other published evidence, of the progress of the cathedral, its palace, and 
 priory, yet it is intimated that they were far advanced by the Norman 
 
JEWS AND monks:— 1137. 
 
 19 
 
 bishop. The general style of architecture in the church and in the oldest 
 part of the palace is truly Norman and characteristic of the age of 
 Herbert: who is said to have taken down the church of St. Michael, on 
 Tombland, and to have surrounded the cathedral precincts with a lofty 
 wall. This external barrier, or fence, was expedient, not only as a matter 
 of privacy and retirement, but as a means of personal security: for we 
 find that the monks and citizens were frequently involved in disputes and 
 sometimes in warfare. About the middle of the twelfth century the 
 former engaged in hostilities with the Jews, who had obtained a settlement 
 in the city soon after the Norman conquest, and had continued from that 
 time to increase in numbers and in wealth : hence they excited the 
 jealousy and enmity of the Christians. The Saxon Chronicle states that 
 the Jews of Norwich, in 1137 , bought a Christian child, or rather boy, 
 about twelve years old, and, in derision of Jesus Christ and of the monks, 
 first tormented, afterwards crucified, and then buried him privately in 
 Thorpe-wood. Most historians refer this event to the year 1144 ; but the 
 writer of the above named chronicle was living at the time, and dates it 
 1137 . It appears, however, that the remains of the crucified martyr and 
 saint, for so he was afterwards registered in the Roman Catholic calendars, 
 were not discovered till 1144 ; when they were removed to the church¬ 
 yard of the monks. Here many miracles were said to be wrought; by 
 which means the monks attracted numerous devotees, and consequently 
 enhanced their revenues. So great was the fame and influence of “ this 
 boy saint,” that in 1150 his corpse was once more removed from its place 
 of sepulture, to be sumptuously enshrined in the church. Thomas, a con¬ 
 temporary monk of Monmouth, amused himself, and abused credulity, in 
 writing an account, in eight books, of the life, martyrdom, and miracles of 
 “ William, the Boy and Martyr.” His work was dedicated to William Turb, 
 Bishop of Norwich. This event appears to have produced the two-fold 
 effect of attracting the favour and support of the Christians in behalf of 
 the new priory and see, and rousing public indignation against the Jews. 
 Many of the latter were deprived of their property and homes, and some 
 were executed; whilst others purchased their lives of the king by large 
 
20 
 
 NORWICH CATHEDRAL. 
 
 sums of money. At subsequent times we find the Jews and Christians 
 at variance; and frequently appealing either to the king, or resorting to the 
 law courts. 
 
 Though we do not learn by any record how much of the cathedral 
 was raised by Herbert, yet Blomefield assigns to him the choir and. the 
 ailes, also the tower and the two transepts. He also states that Bishop 
 Eborard, the successor of Herbert, continued the fabric, by building the 
 whole “ nave, or body of the church, and its two isles, from the anti-choir, 
 or rood-loft door, to the west end; which was so great a work, that some 
 have not scrupled to say that he built the whole church. 3 ” As left by 
 Eborard, the fabric remained till 1171 , when it sustained some damage by 
 fire; but Bishop John de Oxford repaired the injury and fitted it up with 
 ornaments, vestments, &c. about the year 1197 . The lady chapel, at the 
 east end, is represented as the next addition made to the church; and this 
 is ascribed to Walter de Suffield, the tenth bishop, who presided here from 
 1244 to 1257 4 5 . Thus the times of building nearly the whole of the edifice 
 are accounted for. But we shall find that it was afterwards destined to 
 sustain the fury of the elements, and the more destructive fury of a lawless 
 mob. In the year 1271 , on the feast of St. Peter and St. Paul, the tower 
 and church were much injured by lightning (Cotton says by claps of thun¬ 
 der) ; and the monks, who were then singing prime, fled, panic-struck, from 
 the choir. This event was superstitiously thought to presage some greater 
 calamity; and subsequent transactions served to cherish that super¬ 
 stition. The inmates of the monastery and the citizens, who had long- 
 been at variance, came to open war about the year 1234 . The “ commons 
 of the city rose against the former, entered the convent, and robbed and 
 burnt part of it 3 .” A more serious affray occurred in August, 1272 ; when 
 
 3 History of the City of Norwich, ii. 1. 
 
 4 This prelate, though never formally canonized as a saint, was so much renowned for sanctity 
 and goodness, that he was ranked among the English saints; and a noble shrine being raised over 
 his grave, it was visited by pilgrims from many parts of the country. Various miracles were 
 said to have been performed at this place. 
 
 5 Blomefield’s History, &c. of Norwich, i. 40. 
 
BURNING OF THE CHURCH AND MONASTERY 1 * 272 . 
 
 21 
 
 they assailed the monastery on all sides; hut William de Branham, the 
 prior, repelled them for some time by main force. Desperate in their 
 animosity against the clergy, they burnt down the great gates (of the close), 
 with St. Albert’s church, that stood near, and all the books, &c. in it. 
 They next set fire to, and soon consumed the almonry, the church doors, 
 and the great tower. From St. George’s steeple they “ threw fire with 
 slings, and fired the great belfry beyond the quire; so that the whole 
 church was burnt, all but the Virgin Mary cliapel, which was miraculously 
 preserved. They burnt also the dormitory, refectory, strangers’ hall, and 
 the infirmary, with the chapel belonging to it, and almost all the buildings 
 in the court were consumed : these were the monks’ cells, the bakehouse, 
 priors’ stables, and the almshouses 6 . Many of the monastery, some sub¬ 
 deans, others clerks, and some laymen, were killed in the cloister and 
 precinct of the monastery; others were carried out and killed in the city, 
 and others imprisoned. After which they entered the monastery, and 
 plundered it of all gold, silver, holy vessels, books, vestments, and whatever 
 they found not consumed by fire; all the monks, except two or three 
 who were aged, being lied. Not satisfied with this, they continued three 
 days together, slaying, burning, and robbing the tenants and favourers of 
 the church. The prior himself fled to Yarmouth, and, instead of endea¬ 
 vouring to settle the mischief he first began, got together a company of 
 armed men, and came and entered Norwich with trumpet blown and 
 sword in hand, and fell upon the citizens with fire and sword, wounding, 
 killing, and destroying many of them and their houses: which things, 
 when the king was by special messengers informed of, he was very wroth 
 and much grieved; and immediately dispatched messengers to all his ports 
 in England and France, commanding them, that if any Norwich men came 
 thither, they should seize and imprison them till he gave further orders: at 
 the same time he directed letters to all the bishops and nobles of England, 
 commanding them to meet him on St. Giles’s day at Bury, there to enter 
 
 6 “ John Causton, a monk here, saved the cellar of the infirmary and the vaults by quenching 
 the fire with the drink in them.’’—Blomefield. 
 
22 
 
 NORWICH CATHEDRAL. 
 
 into council, and advise him how to proceed against the citizens for these 
 heinous transgressions 7 .” Roger de Skerning, then Bishop of Norwich, 
 called all his clergy together, at Eye in Suffolk, on the 30th of August; 
 when an excommunication was published against all persons concerned in 
 the riots. Some of these are particularly named; among whom are the 
 four bailiffs and the town clerk, with the governors and common council of 
 Norwich. The whole city was put under a general interdict; and the 
 king, after holding a parliament at Bury, visited Norwich, to inflict 
 condign punishment on the offenders. Thirty-four were sentenced to be 
 draw n by horses through the streets, and thus dashed to pieces; others 
 were carried to the gallows, and there hanged, drawn, and quartered ; 
 whilst the women, who were accused of setting fire to the gates, were 
 burnt alive. Some of the richer citizens were doomed to forfeit their 
 houses and goods to the king: but the greatest criminal still remained 
 unpunished. At length, however, the monarch learnt that William de 
 Brunham, the prior, had been the first aggressor, and chief cause of this 
 horrid scene of murder and devastation. The king therefore committed 
 him to the bishop’s prison, and seized on all the manors and property 
 belonging to the priory. He next took possession of the city, and deprived 
 it of its liberties and charters; and appointed keepers in his own name. 
 The prior of Binham was nominated as custos of all the manors, goods, 
 and revenues of the convent: and the king, having thus settled the affairs 
 of the monastery and city, left Norwich on the 27th of September, 1272. 
 William de Brunham next regularly resigned the priory to the bishop, 
 and William de Kirkeby was elected in his place, on the 1st of October 
 following. The bishop, though ill at this time, at his palace at Thorpe, 
 demanded of the citizens a certain sum as a compensation for the damages 
 committed in his cathedral and palace; but they refusing, he again inter¬ 
 dicted the city. Hence animosities once excited continued for a long 
 time: and the servants of Christ, who should not only preach but practice 
 the doctrines of peace, charity, and mercy,^ appear first to have provoked 
 
 7 Such is the account given by Blomefield, i. 54; principally taken from Cotton’s Annals. 
 
DISPUTES OF THE CITIZENS AND CLERGY. 
 
 hostility, and then continued it with unrelenting cruelty and rancour. 
 Cotton, a monk of the church, attributes the whole to the citizens; but 
 Blometield (vol. i. p. 56, &c.) has adduced sufficient evidence to prove that 
 the prior and his colleagues were the aggressors. These transactions, 
 whoever may have commenced them, furnish a strong and gloomy picture 
 of the age; and prove that the human passions when strongly excited, are 
 not likely soon to subside in peace. Accordingly we hud that the mem¬ 
 bers of the monastery and the citizens continued their disputes and fighting 
 a long time; but at length referred the matter to the king and to the pope, 
 in 1274. The latter, however, resigned the whole to the English monarch ; 
 who made the following decree: 
 
 “ 1. That all parties should be real friends. 
 
 “2. That the citizens should pay three thousand marks to build the 
 church again, in six years time; viz. five hundred marks a year. 
 
 “ 3. That they should give to the use of the church a pix, or cup, weigh¬ 
 ing ten pounds in gold, and worth an hundred pounds in money, 
 to serve at the sacrament of the high altar in the cathedral. 
 
 “4. That they might make new gates and entrances into their monastery ; 
 and go in and out of them, whenever they pleased, into any part 
 of the city; so that they injured no man’s private property. 
 
 “5. That at their own charge they should send some of the chief of the 
 citizens to Rome, to assure the pope of the truth of the agree¬ 
 ment, and humbly beg his pardon and peace.” 
 
 “Thus,” observes Blometield, “the unjustifiable rashness of the citizens 
 Yvas severely punished, when the prior and monks, the authors and pro¬ 
 moters of these offences, by the favour of the pope and their bishop, 
 avoided a just punishment.” Towards the latter end of 1275, a patent 
 was granted to the prior, to make what gates he pleased to lead to the 
 monastery; with complete liberty to keep them closed or open at his 
 pleasure. He was also allowed to erect a bridge, twenty feet wide, across 
 the river, with a gate-house on it; and which Blometield supposes was 
 Bishops -Gale and Bridge. 
 
 The cathedral, which is said to have been burnt down during the riots. 
 
 D 
 
'24 
 
 NORWICH CATHEDRAL. 
 
 was re-erected, or more probably repaired and restored, in 1278; when in 
 addition to three thousand marks, paid by the citizens as a fine to re-edify 
 the church, it is related that the king, queen, bishop, and several nobles, 
 contributed different sums for the same purpose. On Advent Sunday, 
 in that year, William de Middleton was enthroned Bishop of Norwich, 
 and on the same day consecrated the cathedral in the presence of King 
 Edward 1. his queen Eleanor, the Bishops of London, Hereford, and 
 Waterford, and many earls, barons, and nobles. On this occasion the 
 Bishop of London dedicated the altar where the body of St. William was 
 enshrined, to our Saviour and All Saints; the Bishop of Hereford dedicated 
 another altar near the choir door; whilst the Bishop of Waterford per¬ 
 formed the same ceremony at a third altar adjoining the sacrist’s chamber- 
 door. The tower having been much injured and weakened by fire, a new 
 one, according to Blomefield, was begun and finished by Bishop Ralf de 
 Walpole, at his own expense: but this event more probably applies to the 
 spire; the style of which, rather than the tower, corresponds with that 
 period. The following entry in Walpole’s Register will partly explain 
 this: “An. 9 Hen. de Lakenham , A. I). 1297, compos, sacrist, expen. turris 
 magni in plumbo bord. stipend, oper. etc. ,£388. 16. 114.” Walpole 
 governed from 1289 to 1299. Two years before his death he commenced 
 the Cloister at the north-east angle, and built the chapter-house. This 
 was commemorated by a stone, fixed in the wall, with the following 
 inscription:— 
 
 HJominus Hatiulfus 02talpolc jlotlmccnsis cptscopus me posutt. 
 
 Richard de Uppenhall, the undertaker or builder of these works, erected 
 three more arches or compartments on the same side of the cloister; at 
 the end of which he inserted another stone, inscribed with his name, &c. 
 The remaining five arches of the cloister on the east side, with the whole 
 of the south walk, were built by Bishop Salmon and his friends. At this 
 time part of the revenues of the monastery was applied to an officer called 
 the pittancer; who being dispensed with, his salary, called pittance money , 
 was expended on the new works. The cloister was continued by other 
 
BUILDING OF THE CLOISTER SPIRE. 
 
 25 
 
 patrons or contributors: accordingly we find that the north walk, attached 
 to the wall of the church, was erected by Master Henry de Well, who 
 expended two hundred and ten marks on it: and twenty pounds more 
 were given by John de Hancock. Bishop Wakeryng built the entrance 
 door-way to the church at the north-west angle of the cloister, as well as a 
 portion of the cloister at that part: and the remainder, to the lavatories, 
 with some door-ways, were raised at the expense of Jeffery Simonds, 
 Rector of St. Mary in the Marsh, at an expense of one hundred pounds. 
 The refectory, strangers’-hall, and other parts of the monastery, were con¬ 
 nected with this end of the cloister. In the year 1302, Walter de Burney, a 
 citizen of Norwich, gave one hundred pounds, and much of the iron-work, 
 towards glazing the windows of the cloister. From the armorial bearings 
 painted on some of these windows, and sculpture on the libs, &c. Blome- 
 field concludes that the rest of the building was “finished by the several 
 families of Morley, Shelton, Scales, Erpingham, Gourney, Mowbray, 
 Thorp, Savage, &c. And thus this famous cloister was finished in the time 
 of William Alnwyk, lord bishop here; and in the third year of William 
 Worsted , prior of the church, who were both considerable benefactors, 
 in the year of our Lord 1430, and in the 133d year from the first begin¬ 
 ning of the work 8 .” The prelate last named was a further benefactor to 
 the church and palace, by building the great gate-house on the north 
 side of the latter, and the screen and great doors to the w est front of the 
 former. In January, 1301, the tower sustained considerable injury by a 
 violent storm. Blomefield says, “ the steeple was blown down, and the 
 quire much damagedbut this can only mean part of the bell-tower. 
 Bishop Percy, to repair this injury, advanced four hundred pounds, and 
 also obtained an aid of nine-pence in the pound from his clergy; by which 
 the tower was repaired—Blomefield says “ built”—and the present Spire 
 first erected. This, as well as part of the church, appears to have sustained 
 some accident by lightning, in the year 1463; but the damage was soon 
 repaired by Bishop Lyhart, who also made considerable improvements and 
 
 s History, &c. of Norwich, vol. ii. p. :5. 
 
w 
 
 NORWICH CATHEDRAL. 
 
 embellishments to the church. He caused the stone roof of the nave to 
 be raised, a new floor to be laid, and an altar-tomb erected over the grave, 
 and commemorative of the founder. Bishop Goldwell, the successor of 
 Lyhart, continued the work of his predecessor, by constructing a hand¬ 
 some stone roof over the choir, and making the upper windows and flying 
 buttresses to the same. Bishop Nix, about the year 1509, erected a stone 
 roof to the north and south transepts. Thus we have ascertained, pretty 
 nearly, and with every appearance of probability, the different ages of the 
 building; and hence the illustrations will become interesting to the archi¬ 
 tectural antiquary, not merely as elucidatory of the history of the present 
 church, but as examples of ecclesiastical architecture of different ages. 
 
©fjap. EM. 
 
 DESCRIPTION OF THE FORM, ARRANGEMENT, AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE 
 CHURCH:—ALSO OF ITS EXTERIOR AND INTERIOR STYLE OF DESIGN AND 
 ORNAMENTS;—AND OF THE VARIOUS PORTIONS OF THE EDIFICE, WITH 
 REFERENCES TO THE ACCOMPANYING PRINTS. 
 
 As a specimen of ancient Anglo-Norman architecture the Cathedral 
 Church of Norwich is highly curious and interesting; and more particu¬ 
 larly so from some peculiarities of form and ornament. Raised under the 
 dynasty of Norman kings and Norman prelates, we naturally expect to 
 find some similitude to the churches and architecture of Normandy; and 
 hence we are also justified in using the term Norman, rather than Saxon 
 or gothic, as designative of the prevailing style of this edifice. 
 
 The whole church now consists of a nave, with two lateral ailes; a north 
 and south transept, without ailes or columns; a choir, occupying part of 
 the nave and area under the tower; an unoccupied space east of the choir; 
 and a chancel, with side ailes continued round the semicircular east end:— 
 a chapel, of two compartments and of very singular form at the south¬ 
 east angle of the church; and a corresponding chapel at the north-east 
 angle: a square chapel, branching from the south aile of the choir; a small 
 chapel, with semicircular east end, on the east side of the north transept; 
 a tow er and spire, rising from the intersection of the transept with the choir 
 and nave; and a cloister, nearly perfect, on the south side of the church. 
 All these members will be more particularized in the following descriptive 
 account; the passages of which between parentheses are by my worthy and 
 intelligent friend, Mr. J. A. Repton. 
 
28 
 
 NORWICH CATHEDRAL. 
 
 (The Cathedral Church of Salisbury, illustrated in a former part of this 
 work, furnished an example of an ancient building almost peculiar for 
 unity of design: the choir, nave, and transepts being uniformly built in one 
 style of architecture, of the date of Henry III. The same unity and 
 character of architecture throughout the whole may be observed in the 
 Cathedral of Norwich; which is however of a much earlier date than that 
 of Salisbury; being in the style called Norman. This character is well 
 known by the semicircular arches, the square-headed capitals and bases of 
 the columns, and the massive contour of the mouldings. The architecture 
 of the Saxons and the early Normans (that is, from the time of the con¬ 
 quest to Henry I.) is extremely massive; not only in the general design of 
 the building, but also in the detail of mouldings, &c. Soon after the reign 
 of Henry I. the heavy character of the Norman style began gradually to 
 partake of more elegant forms : the capitals of the columns became lighter, 
 though with bolder projections; the mouldings of the arches and cornices 
 were more delicately finished; the bead mouldings began to change their 
 massive forms, and towards the reigns of Henry II. and Richard I. they 
 were ornamented with fillets and ogees; the hollow mouldings were more 
 open; the square shape of the abacus of the capital of columns was v 
 changed by degrees into the octangular or circular forms ; while the contour 
 of the arch-mouldings began to lose their square outline, and to sweep 
 round with the shape of the columns. 
 
 (The earliest part of the present church, begun about the reign of William 
 Rufus, still retains its cumbrous and massive character; and the same style 
 is continued through the nave, although raised in the reign of Henry I. 
 This seems to have been done to preserve uniformity in the whole building. 
 
 It should be observed, however, that the plainness or the richness of a 
 building is no proof of its antiquity; because the same bishop (Herbert) 
 who founded this cathedral, adopted the plain and massive style as being 
 applicable to a structure on a great scale; but on the contrary, in erecting 
 the monks’ houses (commonly called the dormitory), a small building- of 
 nearly the same date as the cathedral, he displayed a considerable degree 
 of taste in the richness and lightness of design. See Archaeologia, vol. xv. 
 
’ 
 
 
 X 
 
<PATTHTF.ITillR AT. J^TTIQUITXES. i j T 
 
 Drawn by J. BafscU: 
 
 Brujrawcd byRJlcrtfe. 
 
 NcmWlICIHI (CATIHElMAIL (PmHEOiL 
 
 -EAST 
 
 Aa 
 
 Scale sni 
 
 go 200 210 
 
 WEST 
 
 Pisliops Pala.ce 
 
 GEOTTNX) TIAN 
 
 Showing sites of Tombs, forms of groining in fie Hoof &c. 
 
 ZondonZuMished Julg'xidid, ly Longman Sc C°. LaiernostxrLow. 
 
 Jyimc.1 lv Ccx LSametc. 
 
GROUND PLAN. 
 
 29 
 
 p. 333. The whole body of the cathedral, including the tower, may be 
 said to consist of Norman architecture, except the upper tier of windows 
 of the choir, and the whole vaulting of the church; yet a small fragment of 
 a column and arch against the east end of the tower show that the same 
 design of Norman windows, as in the upper part of the nave, originally 
 continued round the choir, prior to the insertion of the large windows, 
 erected by Bishop Goldwell.) 
 
 DESCRIPTION OF THE CHURCH, WITH REFERENCE TO THE PRINTS. 
 
 Plate I. Ground Plan of the whole cathedral: the darkest shade of 
 which shows the old works, and the lighter teint, later additions and parts 
 at large: a. the great western door-way to the nave: b. b. smaller door¬ 
 ways to the north and south ailes of the nave: c. the nave: d. south aile: 
 e. north aile: f. staircase, with entrance-door on the outside, to the roofs of 
 aile and nave : g. staircase to the galleries, &c.: h. choir, fitted up with stalls 
 and pews : j. north transept : k. south transept : y. end of the same, sepa¬ 
 rated by a wall : l. open space between the choir and altar : m. north aile, 
 and n. south'aile, of the choir: o. chancel, with altar-table, rails, &c.: p. the 
 consistory court, or Bishop Beauchamp’s chapel, called also St. Mary the 
 Less: q. St. Luke’s chapel, now fitted up with pews and pulpit, and used as 
 a parish church for the inhabitants of St. Mary in the Marsh 1 : r. Jesus 
 chapel, with a large altar-tomb, 1, to Sir Thomas Windham, which formerly 
 stood in St. Marys cliapel; the closed entrance to which is at s. and its form 
 marked by dotted lines, t. —(for 37.3 in length, correct to 57.3) : u. a ruinous 
 
 1 It appears that Bishop Herbert built a parish church, called St. Mary in the Marsh, soon 
 after the settlement of the see at Norwich, in a place named Cow-holm; and gave the same to 
 the prior and monks. The contiguous parishes of St. Vedast and St. Ethelbert were subse¬ 
 quently united to that of St. Mary, and continued so till 1504; when “ all the first, and parts of 
 the second and third were consolidated to St. Peter per Mountergate. The remainder of St. 
 Mary’s, and all of St. Ethelbert’s, within the precincts, were also consolidated to the chapel of 
 St. John the Baptist, in the south aile of the cathedral. At the same time the parishioners 
 were allowed to bury in the sextry-yard adjoining the south aile. Soon afterwards, the dean 
 and chapter, and the parishioners, agreed to remove from the aile to St. Luke’s chapel.”— 
 Blomefield, ii. 52. 
 
30 
 
 NORWICH CATHEDRAL. 
 
 chapel, called “ the sexterie, or ancient vestry,” by Blomefield : w and x. site 
 of two chapels, now destroyed, and the arches to the north aile walled upi 
 z. called the precincts gaol, now occupied as a dwelling-house ; and beneath 
 y. is a vault called the dungeon to the gaol. Blomefield says that the “ old 
 chapter-house” was at the east side of the south transept; but that not 
 being the usual situation of the office, I am rather inclined to place it at 
 a. a.; which Blomefield calls St. Edmund's, or the Prior s chapel: b. b. an 
 arched passage from the cloister to the eastern precincts of the church: 
 c.c. door-way from the south transept to the aile of the choir; a view of 
 which constitutes Plate XVIII. Figures i. 11 . in. and iv. refer to piers 
 and a column in the plan, and to corresponding plans of the same, more at 
 large: v. pier, with attached semi-columns, of the second tier over the 
 altar: vi. pier at the east end of the same tier: vii. plan of two piers 
 and intermediate wall, with attached columns and interesting arches, behind 
 the altar: vm. plan of one compartment of the gallery, window, &c. of the 
 third or upper tier over the altar. A series of thirteen similar compart¬ 
 ments extend from the tower round the east end of the church : ix. plan at 
 large of a buttress and clustered columns at the south-east angle of the 
 cloister: x. another buttress, with detached columns, to the same. A 
 series of these extend all round the cloister. 
 
 The small figures, or Arabic numerals, refer to monuments, and to dif¬ 
 ferent members of the church. 1. Altar-tomb to Sir Thomas Windham: 
 2. a low-vaulted part, called the confessional, or confessionary, from which 
 there is a small aperture to the altar: 3. entrance, now closed up, through 
 the wall to the altar? from Jesus chapel: 4. a niche, or recess, behind the 
 altar: 5. font: 6. altar-monument to Sir Wm. Boleyn, great grandfather to 
 Queen Elizabeth; who died October 10, 1505. Opposite to this, between 
 the two corresponding pillars, is a recess called Queen Elizabeth's seat; 
 where it is said a throne was raised for her when she attended divine 
 service at this church : 7. an altar-tomb, raised by the dean and chapter in 
 1(382, in the place of one destroyed in the civil wars, to the memory of 
 Bishop Herbert, the founder of the church: 8. tombs to prior Wm. de 
 YValsham, and Bishop Wakering: 0. altar-tomb, with statue, canopy, &c. to 
 
SEn</rared ly WJLadclytFc therm a Drawing hy JZJMackchxie Car Jjritfmlr -History 9cc cf Harwich Cathedral 
 
 Do or -way and Screen detween S. Transept arid Hide 
 TO TJdE REVl ROBERT TOREY REE. a-Ta&vn, Sc admirer (EEmi^iLarian TEblzcatioiis 
 
 . This Hate is inscribed ly fajjuilor. 
 
 Tendon .Rul?lished' DeEz.ifiiJ by Xcayman Sc CfRiztcniosterRow. 
 
 JPHnad bj Hayward. 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 - 
 
 t 
 
 
 
 
CATHEDRAL ANTIQUITIES.. 
 
 . 3P3L.XZII. 
 
 Drjyy/i ^-J'mpavcJ hy E.bn. EwreTl -from Sketches by JL/LRepfon l:sq r 2F.S.A.. Ter Brzttans Ills terry fee cfUcrwixh CaJuuiral. 
 
 McDIEWHOHI (DATElEIE)IS.AIL CffinJIROT. 
 
 Doors, Windows Sec.. 
 
 Jcnidcni .Published July i .i£i£. h Zangm/ni &. C° JaternosterJow. 
 
 10 .8 
 
 -12 A 
 
 Irmtri by Gjx xJismxtc 
 
' 
 
 , 
 
 ' 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 \ 
 
MONUMENTS :—WEST FRONT. 
 
 ,31 
 
 Bishop Goldwell; a view of which constitutes Plate XVI.: 10. door-way, 
 closed up, to a chapel, probably Heydon’s, at the south-east angle of the 
 south transept : 11. a low tomb, attributed to Sir Thomas Erpingham: 12. 
 an old monument, removed from the anti-choir, to the memory of “ Dame 
 Elizabeth Calthroppe, widow, first the wife of Sir Francis Calthrop, Knight, 
 and last the wife of John Culpeper, Esq. who died Dec. 20, 1582 :” 13 and 
 14. staircases to galleries and to the tower, &c.: 15. door-way from the north 
 transept to the bishop’s palace: 16. door-way, called the priors’ entrance, 
 from the east walk of the cloister to the south aile, shown in the title-page: 
 17. entrance to the choir under the organ-screen: 18. a stone screen, built by 
 Bishop Lyhart; the door-way of which is engraved in Plate XXII. f: 19. 
 altar-tomb to Sir James Hobart , who was attorney-general to King Henry 
 VII. and who died in the year 1507: 20. altar-tomb to Bishop Parkhurst: 
 21. a mural monument against the south wall to ihe Rev. Dr. Porter , called 
 dean by Blomefield; but he was only a prebendary of this church, and died 
 Oct. 5, 1670: 22. a large flat monument for Bishop Nix, arched over: 23. 
 an altar-tomb for Chancellor Spencer, on which the dean and chapter for¬ 
 merly received the money paid by their tenants for rents: 24. door-way 
 from the south aile of the nave to the western walk of the cloister: 25, 
 
 26, and 28. door-ways from the cloister to some of the prebendal houses: 
 
 27. lavatories: 29 and 30. door-ways to the old monastic offices: 31. to the 
 deanery, and dean and chapter’s office: 32. to passage: 33. old windows. 
 
 (Plate II. View of the West End of the cathedral, with the tower and 
 spire at a distance. The centre door-way and the great window are the 
 works of Bishop Alnwyk, built in the reign of Henry V. The folding- 
 doors, finely carved, are shown, Plate XXII. j. On each side of the door¬ 
 way are two empty niches, with pedestals for statues; beneath which are 
 shields charged with arms; and over the canopies are four smaller niches, 
 three of which contain small statues. In the spandrils are two shields, with 
 the arms of the bishop and of the see, each enclosed in a garter, with an 
 inscription. The workmanship of this screen is rather flat and tame. 
 The two turrets at the sides of the great window are finished with stone 
 cupolos, the two external turrets with lead: but these four turrets had 
 
 E 
 
32 
 
 NORWICH CATHEDRAL. 
 
 originally lofty spires, as represented in old prints, and particularly in one 
 given in Browne’s Volume of Posthumous Works.) 
 
 Plate III. Plan and Section of the West Front; showing the proportions 
 of the two ailes, thickness of the walls, height and width of the nave, the 
 three entrance doors, with four blank arches at the west end of the nave, &c. 
 — Plan. a. central door-way, with the new work, k.k. by Bishop Alnwyk: 
 B. northern, and c. southern doors: d. d. stairs in the turrets: e. window: 
 f. blank arches and columns, continued all round the church: g. pier: h. 
 flat pilaster buttress, with cylindrical mouldings at the angles.—The figures 
 in the Section refer—1. window to the north aile: 2. original window, 
 now walled up, to gallery over roof of aile: 3. a modern square-headed 
 window: 4. section of arch, with the form of its soffit between the nave 
 and the south aile: 5. section of the arched roof over the aile, at the inter¬ 
 section of the groining of the vault: 6. section of the same between the 
 column and pier: 7. door-ways to stairs: 8. modern cupolos: 9. section of 
 the stone vaulting: 10. the same, with sections of the ribs: 11. original 
 windows, with mullions and tracery of later date, from the west front to 
 the galleries over the ailes: 12. door-way, with three arches differently 
 shaped; over which is a passage beneath the great window: 13. section of 
 archivolt moulding to blank arches round the ailes. 
 
 Plate IV. Architectural Details: a. one compartment of the upper story 
 on the east side of the north transept, in which is a singular column, cut 
 to imitate the scales of fish: the situation of this is shown in Plate IX. 
 Another column, with triangular indentations, is also found in the same 
 story, r :—b. and d. string courses, with indented and billet ornaments ; 
 also sections of the same, b. and d.; these prevail in various parts of the 
 church : c. and g. capitals to small columns in the upper story of the north 
 transept: h. capitals and bases to pilaster columns, at the east end of the 
 gallery over the ailes: i. architrave and arch-moulding, with lintel to a 
 door-way to the stairs on the east side of the north transept: e. blank 
 arches, with intersecting mouldings, attached to the wall behind the altar: 
 f. small blank arches, with triangular mouldings, &c, over the door-way to 
 the north transept. 
 
CATHEBEAJL A^TTIQUITIE S <. 
 
 totl 
 
 2/aJicd by TT/rrry Xc J&itX from &J)ravnn 4 ~byJL.CatZ&7nolc ivrXrttfzmslIistcry Sec cflNcrnich Cz&icJrol . 
 
 Section kTlooi of West JEfid 
 
 ZcndonSiSUsked fy Zcnarmm kC°f<ziz*7ioster JS/rw Sforch z.idif 
 
 SnraxA hy UjsywjrZ 
 

 
 
 
 
 >: 
 
 \ 
 
 
 > 
 
 
 i 
 
 v 
 
 
 
 
 
CATHEDRAL ANTIQUITIES 
 
 . Etched by EBlare, -from Steadies by J] Britton tor Brittons History • Sec. ofJEorwidi (dihedral. 
 
 NomWICIHI <DA.TMEDmA.3L CIKDJIECM,.' 
 
 .Architectural Details. 
 
 london Jtuhlis/icd .Aug jBjB, by Zorupum k C°. Paternoster Jtow. 
 
 jy/Jiud ty dvr 
 

Interior k Exterior of one Conxpartfrienz of the Wove at the West End 
 Xondi>n.TuHuhed OctZi 1810 b/Xonaman ,{- CXPaternosttrRow. 
 
 

 I 
 
 
 
 
 ■ 
 
 
 * 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
CATEEEBKAL ANTIQUITIES. T0L.TI o 
 
 j Kerch,! h . T?7m Adey ReprtonEsq?. Architect k ASA. ScZtAul by JbhnXeJSeuec, rbr£r irons Aistcry See. _ ofJTbrmch Cathedral Church■ 
 
 WOISWECM CA.TIHI1EBIRAIL (DEHJIRCIHI, 
 
 Yiew of fhe Tower. 
 
 XonJcrtTubUshed Jan?2,1810 byXonanum. Sc CSTatemcsterXlow. 
 
 Jlrt/jal by Shy war.I. 
 
NAVE AND TOWER. 
 
 33 
 
 (Plate V. Elevations, Interior a. and Exterior b. of one compartment of 
 the north side of the nave, with section of the great west window and door. 
 The original Norman part of the building may be distinguished from sub¬ 
 sequent alterations and additions; some of which will be pointed out. 
 There remains one of the original Norman windows on the north side of 
 the choir, with its semicircular arch, and ornamented with the billet mould¬ 
 ing. The second tier of windows, marked d. are filled up, and larger 
 windows with a wall built over them, with battlements, and covered with 
 a flat lead roof; but it was originally finished with a slanting roof from the 
 top of the windows, d. to the underside of the clerestory windows. These 
 upper windows had plain Norman openings, instead of the present flat 
 arches of the sixteenth century, divided by a mullion, made probably at 
 the same time with the vaulting of the nave and transepts. These vault¬ 
 ings are supported by slender columns of the same date, the lower part 
 of which rest on angels holding shields. The same design of shields, with 
 the pelican, &c. are represented in the north and south transepts. 
 
 A. a. section of the entrance door-way: b. the old arch of the same: c. 
 blank arches under the window of the aile: d. interior of wall, with one 
 of the old windows and blank arches on each side, in the gallery over the 
 aile: e. upper tier of windows of the nave, before which there is a narrow 
 passage with open arches and a wall: f. base to a column: and g. capital 
 to clustered columns, from which spring the ribs beneath the vaulted 
 roof:—B. a. modern window: b. string course of double billet moulding, 
 which continues all round the exterior of the church : c. blank arches, 
 with semicircular mouldings, having regular bases and capitals, and w hich 
 continue round the church: cl. original window, closed up: e. pilaster 
 buttress, with cylindrical columns at the angles: f. modern window: and 
 g. blank arched panels, which continue round the upper part of the nave 
 and transepts. 
 
 (Plate VI. Perspective View of the West and South Sides of the Tower 
 and the lower part of the spire. The whole tower with the low turrets 
 serve as a beautiful specimen of Norman architecture of about the time of 
 Henry I. if not of King Stephen, and before the changes which soon took 
 
34 
 
 NORWICH CATHEDRAL. 
 
 place in the Norman style. The lower tier of Norman windows and the 
 row of arches over them are repaired, and with stones of different dimen¬ 
 sions from those of the original work. The battlements of the tower, the 
 centre spire, and the four small spires, including the carved leaves of the 
 turrets, are in the style of the fifteenth or sixteenth century. 
 
 (Plate VII. Interior View of the Tower, with the open gallery which 
 leads to the battlements and spire. In the upper rows of arches are the 
 windows represented in the lower tier of Plate VI. Through the great 
 arch of the tower is seen part of the north transept.) 
 
 Plate VIII. Elevation of Part of the North Side of the East End, 
 showing three divisions in height and in width. In the lower story 
 we perceive that the original semicircular arches have been altered, and 
 flattened arches with ornamental spandrils, blank arches, canopies, &c. 
 introduced. Over these is a perforated parapet before the gallery, a. 
 blank arches: b. modern wall under a pointed arch, which formerly opened 
 to a small chapel on the north side of the church, corresponding with the 
 Beauchamp chapel on the opposite side: c. recess with panelling and 
 canopy, the site of Queen Elizabeth’s throne: d. section of steps to, and 
 platform for the altar: e. arch of the semicircular end: f. three panels with 
 shields, charged with arms; two of which are given more at large, Plate 
 XVI. a. and b. : g. niche, canopy, pinnacles, &c. shown larger, Plate XVI. 
 f. as h. is at c.: i. two panels, with elaborate tracery and blank shields: k, 
 three of the old windows, now closed up: 1. open parapet: m. open 
 passage behind the clustered columns, which support ogee arches, o. and 
 the groining of the roof, n : p. part of the window of the clerestory of the 
 circular end, one of which is shown Plate XXII. e. : q. part of arch, of 
 horse-shoe form. 
 
 Plate IX. A geometrical Elevation and Section, in outline: showing the two 
 transepts, tower, and spire, with part of the cloister; one half representing 
 the inside, the other the outside of the whole structure, a. Section of the 
 north door: b. chapel, shown in ground-plan, u.: c. door-way to stairs: d, 
 door-way to north aile: e. pier at north-east angle of tower: f. screen: g\ 
 elevation and section of piers, arches, &c. on the south side of the nave; 
 
CATHEMLAL AMTiOFITIE S. 
 
 Sketchd by Joh/i jldey Repton Jtsq'Hrchixzrt Icjt. SjL and EtduL by Henry ZeCKeux, ii>r JjrittonS His tnry tcc.of Harwich Cathedral 
 
 TOmwnm catihieieirail mmc®. 
 
 View of the. Interior of the Tower . 
 
 TO SIR TU02IAS GAGE BAR? ofSmgraveiEall, ari-Admirer kTronwter <VTopographical kTbrtiquarutn Works 
 ■ . This Ttole. is Inscribed by 
 
 Zo?idm,Tublished Ja/tzj.816 tyZongniankCTaXerncsterJfow 
 
 Trimtl IjHaynard 
 
-. 2,8 
 
•3 
 
 
 
 
THEEWiff at. TIO1S7ITHE..' j 
 
 Drawn Vv ILdLlcy Jieptcn jEsqEdrchitcct SEF.SLA. 
 
 .Enaraved 1'v.EJm. TttrreU. 
 
 EfORWDCIBI C AT HIE© E&AIL CMIPIECSjl, 
 
 Tlewition, of S. Transept k half of Tower. kc. 
 
 Section ofTf. Transept Sc luff erf Tower, kc. 
 
 1 ,m 3 .cn,Tublishad by Lon,] /rum & C°.TaternosterJicwMarch v.J.816. 
 

 ) 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 
 /• 
 
 
 
 
 
PT. -TWI . 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
LOTTIES. 
 
 View of the Nave, looking east. 
 
 TO THE REV**JOSEPH Turner D.D. Jean of. Zforwich, Sc Master of Tembroke College . Cambridge, who has g aid laudable attention 
 
 to die fabridc, Sc interests of his Church, das flute is respectfully inscribed by J.fritton. 
 Zoridon JabUshedWov r ij.dz6. ly Zon/man Sc C° Zazzmoster Row. 
 
j&wnmrf h railf,'. /irfr/' « 'Aito lyX.Caternwlc. for Zrilhmd Xisttry Sx ofSormch CalheJnL. 
 
 FtfPIEWKDlHI <D ATHGIS ©IEAIL CMHJ1ECIHI, 
 
 T'&M' of -the East End kc. 
 
 XO CBZBZES rniBVEZ Xsqf M.T thus Elate is insa-ded ly ihe siuEwr. 
 Zandon.TdtUdf'd Scpf1.1d16.by Zonyman to C° EatemOftsrJlaw 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 \ 
 
 
 
 
 
NORTH TRANSEPT:-EAST END:—NAVE:—CHOIR. 
 
 35 
 
 h, south aile: i. east end of the cloister against the prior’s entrance: k. 
 four windows of the east side of the cloister :-l. m. n. three divisions of the 
 exterior of the west side of the south transept: o. turret, with modern 
 pinnacles to the same: p. gallery over the south aile, walled up: q. arched 
 trusses at the angle of the tower, on four of which the spire rests: r. 
 section of the roof of the north transept: s. elevation of the east end over 
 the altar. The principal measurements are given on the plate.) 
 
 Plate X. View of the North Transept, with parts of the tower, nave, 
 and east end. The niche over the north door contains an old statue, said 
 to be of the founder, Losinga. 
 
 Plate XI. View of the Church from East End, displays the east side of 
 the tower and spire from the junction of the former with the transept, 
 also the east side of the south transept, the passage to the, cloister, part 
 of the precincts gaol, the Beauchamp chapel, with the chapels of Jesus 
 and St. Luke; it also shows the eastern and southern sides of the cleres¬ 
 tory, with its lofty and elegant windows, the flying buttresses, and panelled 
 parapet; also the two closed arches which formerly>opened to the lady 
 chapel: but the most curious objects of this print are the two chapels, 
 which from their forms and style of decoration are peculiarly interest¬ 
 ing in a history of ancient ecclesiastical architecture. In this view the 
 artist has omitted a wall and some shrubbery belonging to a gentleman’s 
 garden. 
 
 Plate XII. Vieiv of the Nave from the west end, looking east, shows the 
 style of architecture which characterizes this portion of the edifice; the 
 older part of which is distinguished for its simplicity and solidity, whilst 
 the upper part is of a light, lofty, and elegant style. In this view is repre¬ 
 sented the screen across the nave, built by Bishop Lyhart; beyond which 
 is the organ-screen: the space between the two is called the anti-choir; 
 and near it are two columns, with spiral flutes, &c. 
 
 (Plate XIII. Interior Vieiv of the Choir. The lower tier of arches 
 behind the altar, with the capitals of columns, the fluted panels, and small 
 arches, are modern repairs and additions. The second tier of arches, &c. 
 
36 
 
 NORWICH CATHEDRAL. 
 
 still retains the original Norman work, of Bishop Herbert. The upper 
 windows and the vaulting are the works of Bishop Goldwell, in the reign 
 of Henry VII. On the left, against the north-east pier of the tower, is the 
 chancellor’s stall, made from several ancient fragments of carved wood. 
 On the opposite side is the bishop’s throne, of modern workmanship. The 
 painted glass at the east end was the work and the gift of Mrs. Lloyd, the 
 wife of the late dean. This however disfigures, rather than ornaments, its 
 station. 
 
 (Plate XIV. Interior View of the North Aile of the choir, showing the 
 whispering gallery, or confessionary, and the entrance into Jesus’ chapel.) 
 The eagle reading-desk and drapery do not usually remain in this situa¬ 
 tion, but were placed here merely to delineate the former. 
 
 Plate XV. Details of Six Subjects, a. b. two panels with arms of the 
 Boleyn family, &c. over the arches near the altar: c. ogee canopy near 
 the same, with elegant foliated crockets, finial, and cusps: d. niche with 
 pedestal, canopy, &c. in the east wall of the Beauchamp chapel: e. summit 
 of one of the buttresses at the east end, of Bishop Goldwell’s time: f. 
 an elegant canopy, with pinnacles against the wall near the altar, of the 
 same age. 
 
 Plate XVI. View of Dishop GoldwelVs Monument. This is the only 
 enriched tomb with a statue in the cathedral, and as a specimen of the 
 style of monumental sculpture and architecture is interesting. It consists of 
 an altar-tomb of white marble, with several niches, canopies, and pedestals 
 at the sides and end, a recumbent statue of the bishop on the top, and 
 a canopy adorned with panelling, ogee arches, freize, and parapet. The 
 side against the south aile is ornamented with panelling, as well as the 
 ends at the head and feet of the tomb. 
 
 Plate XVII. The front e. and profile d. of the Dishop’s Effigy, which is 
 distinguished for its enriched vestments. These are the cope, with a rich 
 border of lace, closed on the breast with a large square morse, or fibula; 
 beneath the cope is the dalmatic, alb, stole, &c. as usual; and hanging 
 from the left arm is the maniple. The crozier, with part of the mitre, which 
 
ZondorL Published* Ju/ie l.iSid, by Lamp turn 
 
 Author 
 

 
/ 
 
 
 '>• 
 
 •*4 
 
 
 c 
 
 
 
 f 
 
JBishop Goldwells Statue, lee 
 
 Zendon.TublisTied May 1,2.816 by 
 
 Zonijnum k CZattniesterZicw. 
 
 UinfeJ by (bx L-J)iir/iar. 
 

 
 ■ f 
 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 \ 
 
 I 
 
 / , 
 
 
 / 
 

 
 
 ■ 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
East end of the South*looking East. 
 
 T0 DAWS ON TURNER ESQ R an admirer k patron ofTopography kAntu/iddes. 
 
 ThisIUte is inscribed by J£ ritto , 
 London.TublishedMarch L.iSid lyZongman kCTaamosterRow. 
 
DOOR-WAY AND SCREEN :—SOUTH AILE OF EAST END. 
 
 37 
 
 was formerly much ornamented, and the head of a clerk, at the feet, are 
 broken. The head rests on two cushions, and the feet against a crouching 
 lion, on which is an opened book, and a mutilated small figure of a clerk, 
 or priest. The small statues a. b. c. are from the prior’s door-way in the 
 cloister, and represent an archbishop, a. with the pall depending in front: 
 the Deity, or Christ, b. : and a king, c. Each of these figures, as well as 
 four others standing over the same door-way, are beneath canopies of ogee 
 and acutely-pointed arches; and beneath the feet of five of them are smaller 
 figures, most likely intended to personify so many vices or sins. The 
 whole of this door-way, shown in the title, is a curious, and I presume 
 unique example of architecture. Mr. Repton considers “ the mixture of 
 the straight with ogee gables ” as singular, and more particularly so “ as 
 these gables are heavily loaded with crockets, different from the light, 
 elegant crockets of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. The plain 
 straight gables belong to the time of Henry III. and prevailed long after 
 that period, but the ogee arches did not begin till about the end of that 
 monarch’s reign.” 
 
 Plate XVIII. View of a Door-way , with Niches and Canopies , in the 
 soffit, and an open screen above. The latter is inserted in an old Norman 
 arch, which still retains its original capitals, with billet and embattled 
 mouldings. The numerous mullions and tracery of this window, which 
 appears to have been glazed, characterize the last period of decorated 
 architecture; and from the initials of R. C. and P. N. on the lock of the 
 doors, it is generally supposed that the whole was erected by the last 
 prior and first dean, William Castleton: but although P. N. may stand for 
 Prior of Norwich, it is not easy to make R. C. stand for William Cas¬ 
 tleton. There can be little doubt however that this work was executed 
 about the time of Bishop Nyx, A. D. 1501, when the stone roofs of the 
 transepts, &c. were raised. 
 
 Plate XIX. View of the East End of the South Ailc of the choir, show¬ 
 ing the semicircular turn behind the altar, with the style and forms of the 
 vaulted roof, clustered piers, &c. In the foreground is a very fine font, 
 ornamented with a profusion of sculptured figures and basso relievo, repre- 
 
33 
 
 NORWICH CATHEDRAL. 
 
 senting the Sacraments, &c 2 . In the distance are two pointed arches, now 
 closed up, but which formerly opened to the lady chapel. Over the two 
 arches is a plain quatrefoil window, enclosed by a circular moulding. This 
 form is generally found about the time of Henry III. 
 
 Plate XX. View of the North Walk of the Cloister, looking east. 
 Although this cloister was built at different periods, and by different 
 persons, we find a general uniformity of style prevail in the details of 
 columns, capitals, and groinings, and even in many of the mouldings of 
 the four sides. Yet by close examination a progressive change in archi¬ 
 tecture may be found in the tracery of the windows, commencing at the 
 east end, and continuing through the south, the west, and terminating with 
 the north. An early one is delineated in Plate XXII. a. whilst two 
 of the latest, in the north side, are shown in the same plate, b. c. By the 
 rabbets in the midlions of the upper part of this cloister, it is concluded that 
 it was originally glazed. At the south-west angle of the cloister are two 
 lavatories; and the whole roof is enriched with a great number and variety 
 of sculptured bosses, or orbs. Many of these are interesting, as speci¬ 
 mens of sculpture, and as representations of scriptural and monastic 
 events 3 . 
 
 2 A very splendid font of this class is preserved at Walsingham, in Norfolk ; a view of which, 
 with description, and also an account of another at East Dereham, are given in the “Architectural 
 Antiquities.” 
 
 3 The following account of the cloister at Norwich, by William of Worcester, who wrote his 
 Itinerary A. D. 1478, may be regarded as curiouSv 
 
 “ Claustrum ecclesia; cathedralis Norwicensis. 
 
 “ Anno Domini MCCLXXXXVII. inceptum est opus claustri Norwicensis ecclesia; ante 
 domum capitularum cum ipsa domo capitulari a domino Radulpho Walpole Norwicensi tunc 
 episcopo. Sicut patet per scripturam sculptam in petra posita in occidentali parte claustri, ante 
 hostium capituli, quae tabs est, “ Dominus Radulphus Walpole Norwicensis episcopus me 
 posuit;” ac etiam a Ricardo Uppehalle fundatore predicti operis, sicut patet per scripturam 
 sculptam in petra posita in orientali parte ejusdem claustri ex parte aquilonari hostii capituli 
 antedicti, qua; tabs est, “ Ricardus Uppehalle lntjus operis inceptor me posuit:” et facta sunt 
 per eosdem ties le civers tantum cum domo capitulari; residuum vero 5 versus ecclesiam cum 
 hostio ejusdem et versus hostium quo transitin' ad infirmariam, et ab illo hostio usque ad illas 
 les civerys in quibus mariatagia dependent, factum est samptibus domini Johannis Elys Nor- 
 
SOTIQTOTiOSS, 
 
 J U r b'q iuchyj_rj jj) szu&u/tyuar 'ippm q&cpjonti y/ ■zivLf yiy t 
 
 ■X)g.svBO£jo .nimqo£ 7>.,ni/nprmbnQ.joumgnyvw SXSXTS XMt 
 'i^M. fruiyooq jaisicyj mp jo &pif ip-tojl zip po mm/\ 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
PL o TTJ , 
 
 CATHEDPAL PITIES. 
 
 - JEnhcd hv JJLvu .Hvm al/rawvia byJL. latt/rmolc, rorBnitxnsEisrory kc.ofJVorwtih CuheJrol. 
 
 M©mWII(DI CATMEIDIRAIL OTCJIKXDIHI, 
 
 Details. 
 
 Zondcn r PiJilLs/icds4iy' t ±JJif.bImprum ZC°?taenu>sar£m. 
 
 jFrintal by Cox k-JOamac. 
 
st. John’s chapel:—cloister, and details. 
 
 39 
 
 Plate XXI. Details, a. door-way, and its door covered with ornamental 
 hinges, leading to St. Johns chapel , now a school-room. Plate XXII. h. 
 shows a circular window, enclosing semicircular and triangular mouldings, 
 to the vault or crypt of the same chapel. This edifice was erected by 
 Bishop Salmon, who died in 1325; but the door-way and porch appear to 
 have been built by Bishop Lyhart. Plate XXI. b. capitals to clustered 
 columns in the middle story over the altar: c. capital and bracket in the 
 upper story of the nave, from which spring the groinings under the roof: 
 
 e. capital, with embattled bracket and demi-angel, in Jesus’ chapel: d. capi¬ 
 tal to a circular column, with spiral flutes, in the nave. There is another 
 similar column on the opposite side of the nave; see Ground Plan, No. hi.: 
 
 f. an inscription, repeated four times, on a scroll in the Erpingham gate. 
 This word or abbreviation has excited much doubt and speculation. 
 Blomefield, Sir Thomas Browne, and most writers since his time, read it 
 plna, or pena, for penance; but Dr. Sayer suggests a more probable and 
 
 wicensis episcopi et aliorum amicorum, necnon et per pitanciariae officium ad hoc specialiter 
 deputatum; pars vero aquilonaris facta est, quo ad parietem juxta ecclesiam et le voltyng, 
 sumptibus magistri Henrici Well scilicet CC et decem marcis, ac etiam XX lib. per magistrum 
 Johannem Hancock eidem assignatis et datis, necnon et per predictum officium pitanciariae. A 
 maritagiis vero cum hostio refectorii ac lavatoriis factum est sumptibus Galfridi Simonds rectoris 
 de Marisco scilicet C libris, et ab hostio aulae hospitum usque ad introitum in ecclesiam cum 
 hostio ejusdem; ac quo ad parietem juxta aulam antedictum et le voltyng factum est per execu- 
 tores domini Johannis Wakerying quondam episcopi Norwicensis. Et sic completion est opus 
 claustri famosissimi anno domini MCCCCXXX. tempore domini Wyllelmi Alnewyck episcopi 
 Norwicensis, et domini Wyllelmi Wursted prioris ejusdem ecclesia anno tertio: tempus a prin- 
 cipio operis usque ad finetn CXXXIII annis. 
 
 “ Claustrum Norwicensis ecclesice cathedralis. 
 
 “ Longitudo claustri ecclesia; cathedralis a parte boreali ad meridionalem versus le frayter 
 continet 60 virgas, id est 180 pedes. 
 
 “ Longitudo ejusdem secundem gressus meos 90 gradus. 
 
 “ Et longitudo claustri ex parte altera, ubi le chapitell-hous scituatur, continet 57 virgas. 
 
 “ Et latitudo claustri ex omnibus quatuor partibus ejus continet infra muros et fenestras 4 
 virgas, id est 12 pedes. 
 
 “ Longitudo tocius navis ecclesiae cum choro cathedralis Norwici preter capcllam Beata; 
 Maria; continet CCXXVI gressus meos. 
 
 “ Latitudo dictae navis continet XL gressus meos." 
 
 F 
 
40 
 
 i 
 
 NORWICH CATHEDRAL. 
 
 plain exposition, by reading it yenk, an abbreviation for think , or thank; a 
 mot, or motto, of Erpingham, and expressive of his thanks for the bishop’s 
 pardon. This opinion is almost confirmed by a motto on a ring found at 
 Wymondham in Norfolk, with the words “ Yank God of all" and by an 
 inscription, often repeated, on the church of Great Ponton, Lincolnshire, 
 of “ Thynke God of all."— g. and i. capitals to pilaster columns under an 
 arch of the tower: h. base to a column, probably cut and intended for a 
 capital, in the upper story of the north transept. 
 
 Plate XXII. Architectural Details, a. b. c. three different windows in 
 the Cloister, already referred to: d. part of an open screen, with quatrefoils 
 and embattled parapet: e. one of the upper windows over the altar, temp. 
 Henry Y SI. : f. door-way, with enriched spandrils, canopies, and pedestals 
 under the arch, built by Bishop Lyhart about 1450: g. great gate of 
 entrance to the bishop’s palace, called St. Martin’s Palace Gate. The 
 arch, of several mouldings, is formed of stone, and the spandrils filled with 
 tracery and shields; on the sides of which are two small columns, sur¬ 
 mounted by embattled capitals. Over the arch is a series of panelled com¬ 
 partments, with blank shields, and the letter M crowned. The large door 
 is enriched with tracery, blank shields, &c. On the west side of this door¬ 
 way is a smaller door, also charged with carving and tracery, among 
 which is a heart and a mitre repeated. This gate-house is supposed to 
 have been built by Bishop Lyhart, and repaired by Bishop Sparrow: h. 
 already described in p. 39: i. the large double doors to the central western 
 entrance, sometimes called the procession door, made by Bishop Alnwyk. 
 
 Plate XXIII. View of the Erpingham Gate-house from the west, with 
 part of the west front of the cathedral, &c. Among the great variety of 
 subjects and designs in the ecclesiastical architecture of England, the pre¬ 
 sent gate-house may be regarded as original and unique: and considering the 
 state of society when it was raised, and the situation chosen, we are doubly 
 surprised: firstly, at the richness and decoration of the exterior face, and 
 secondly, in beholding it so perfect and unmutilated after a lapse of four 
 centuries. The archivolt mouldings, spandrils, and two demi-octangular 
 buttresses are covered with a profusion of ornamental sculpture; among 
 
TO WILLIAM WILKINS ESQ* ARCRITKCT, F.S.A the Author ofOie Antiquities of Myna, Grataa. 
 
 and of oilier literary wor/cs _ This Tlate is inscribed by J.2$rti£07l. 
 
 Published Jun 
 

 
 ) 
 
 
 - 
 
 
 
ERPINGHAM GATE-HOUSE. 
 
 41 
 
 which are thirty-eight small statues of men and women, various shields of 
 arms, trees, birds, pedestals, and canopies: most of these are very perfect, 
 and some of the figures are rather elegant. The shields are charged with 
 the arms of Erpingham, Walton, and Clopton ; the two latter being the 
 names of Sir Thomas’s two wives. In the spandrils are shields containing 
 emblems of the crucifixion, trinity, and other ceremonies of the catholic 
 church, whilst each buttress is crowned with a sitting statue; one said to 
 represent a secular, and the other a regular priest 4 . In a canopied niche, 
 in the pediment, which is plain, and composed of flint, is a kneeling statue, 
 supposed to represent Sir Thomas. About half way up the gable, on the 
 parapet, are two pedestals, with parts of figures emblematic of two of the 
 evangelists, and two others were formerly higher up. The origin and 
 decoration of this curious gate-house serve to exemplify the history of the 
 age when it was raised. The reforming principles of Wiclif had made a 
 strong impression on the mind of Sir Thomas, and he appears to have 
 exerted himself in disseminating them in Norfolk. This conduct naturally 
 excited the opposition and enmity of the bishop and the monks; who being 
 more powerful than the knight, had him arrested and committed to prison, 
 and afterwards enjoined him to build the present gate-house, both as an 
 atonement for his heresy, and as a public memorial of contrition in the 
 reformer, and power and domination of the priesthood. Sir Thomas was 
 
 1 Blomefield states that the secular priest has a book in his hand, and is teaching a youth who is 
 standing by him; whilst the other figure, of a regular monk, has also a book in his hand, but 
 appears to disregard its contents, and to direct his eyes to passengers who may go through the 
 gate. This is “ designed,” says the same author, “ by the founder to signify that the secular 
 clergy not only laboured themselves in the world, but diligently taught the growing youth, to 
 the benefit of the world; when the idle regular, who by his books also pretends to learning, did 
 neither instruct any, nor improve himself: by which he covertly lashed those that obliged him 
 to this penance, and praised those that had given him instruction in the way of truth.” This 
 inference of the Norfolk topographer does not appear very probable: for the bishop and monks 
 would hardly permit a permanent satire to be raised on their own ground, and before their faces. 
 However hostile Sir Thomas might have been towards the intolerant monks, it is evident that 
 he ostensibly conformed to their external ceremonials, by the general design and detail of this 
 structure. 
 
42 
 
 NORWICH CATHEDRAL. 
 
 subsequently reconciled to the bishop by the commands of the king, (Henry 
 IV.) who, in a parliament held February 9, 1400, declared that the pro¬ 
 ceedings of the knight against the bishop were good, and originated in 
 great zeal; and as the latter was of royal lineage,' he directed them to 
 “shake hands and kiss each other in token of friendship, which they did; 
 and it afterwards proved real, Sir Thomas becoming a great benefactor to 
 the cathedral, and a firm friend to the bishop as long as he lived 5 .” 
 
 Plate XXIV. Views of ilie East and West Fronts of St. Elhelbert's , or 
 St. Albert's Gate-house and Chapel. This building appears to have been 
 erected by the citizens as an atonement for injury done to the cathedral 
 and its gates in the great insurrection of 1272. A rector officiated here for 
 some time after it was raised; who withdrawing himself to St. Mary’s, a 
 priest supplied his place and subsisted on the voluntary offerings of stran¬ 
 gers. These not being sufficient to support him, the chapel was let to the 
 Cellerer , who accounted in 1519 for the profits of the house or chapel over 
 the “ great gates.”—In the view of the west front, on the left hand of the 
 accompanying plate, the upper part shows the original tracery of stone let 
 into flints. Beneath is a series of blank niches, with a statue in the centre; 
 and four small aperture windows, now closed up, which served as loop¬ 
 holes for arrows, &c. to repel any attacks from the outside. The acute 
 pediments and crockets are truly of the style and age of Edward I. In 
 the spandrils of the great arch are figures, in basso-relievo, of a man with 
 a sword and a round shield attacking a dragon. The eastern face of this 
 building consists of stone and flint, with a large arch-way at bottom, and a 
 pointed arched window', with stone tracery let into flint-work, above. 
 
 General Character of the Church. As an object of architectural antiquity 
 the Cathedral Church of Norwich is peculiarly interesting; for it comprises 
 in its different members many curious specimens of archilecture, and some 
 forms and features of unique character. Compared with many other 
 cathedrals it is however small in size and meagre in embellishment. Its 
 
 5 Biomefield, i. 524, from Priune’s Abridgment of Records, fol. 405. 
 
iP¥-„ ~y~y n\ /~ 
 
 'Ethelserts Gate-house:East Sc West trouts. 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
BEAUTIES AND DEFORMITIES OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 43 
 
 transepts are narrow; the ailes of the nave are small and low; the east 
 end and north side are dilapidated and ragged ; almost the whole surface 
 of the building presents a ruinous appearance; the north side of the nave 
 is obscured and darkened by a mass of trees in the bishop’s garden; some 
 houses are attached to and obscure the face at the south-west end; and 
 at the east side of the south transept are other extraneous and unpleasant 
 appendages. All these are defects that not only detract from the beauty 
 and character of the church, but some of them are injurious to its stability. 
 Besides, these encroachments render it impossible to see the whole cathe¬ 
 dral, or the greater part, from any one station. Although it is the duty of 
 the impartial historian to point out these defects, and to regret that they 
 should exist at the present day, he more gladly directs his mind and pen to 
 beauties and merits. In the semicircular, or altar-end of the church, as 
 viewed from the choir (see Plate XIII.), there is an union of solidity and 
 elegance which cannot fail to delight the spectator; and he will view the 
 lanthorn, under the tower, with pleasure. The whole vaulting of the 
 church is finely executed ; and the bosses, at the intersection of the ribs, 
 contain a vast variety of curious sculpture. The nave presents an interest¬ 
 ing series of semicircular arches, with corresponding piers, columns, and 
 ornaments: and although narrow and long in its proportions, is impressive 
 and grand. In the cloister the antiquary and general observer will find 
 much to excite curiosity and admiration. The lavatories, door-ways, 
 windows, and buttresses, with their clustered columns, are all entitled to 
 critical examination; and w ill amply reward that by the gratification they 
 must afford. The Erpingham gate-house, however, is the most elegant and 
 most curious architectural object connected with this church. Unique in 
 origin, form, decoration, and condition, it commands admiration: and is 
 entitled to a more ample elucidation than I have been enabled to give it in 
 this volume. 
 
 Having thus pointed out the dates, general characteristics, and styles of 
 the different parts of the church, it may be necessary to detail a few events, 
 and notice other objects connected with the establishment. 
 
 Norwich, like most of the catholic cathedrals, formerly contained several 
 
44 
 
 NORWICH CATHEDRAL, 
 
 chapels, chantries, and altars : for it was heretofore the custom of the more 
 wealthy part of the laity, as well as the clergy, to found these either in 
 cathedrals or parish churches; expecting thereby to propitiate the Deity, 
 and secure the prayers of prelates and priests. In Norwich cathedral we 
 find the following list of chapels and altars alluded to in different parts of 
 Blomefield’s account of the church. 
 
 St. Berneys, or St. Amies Chapel , founded by John de Berney, who was 
 buried here in 1374, was between two columns on the north side of 
 the altar-steps. 
 
 A Chapel to St. John Baptist was founded in the south aile of the choir 
 of the church, but by whom, or at what time, is not noticed. 
 
 St. Mary the Great, or the Virgin Chapel, at the east end of the church, 
 was founded and built by Bishop Walter de Suffield. 
 
 Si. Mary the Less, St. Mary of Pity , or Holy-rood Chapel, was situated 
 under the rood-loft at the entrance to the choir. 
 
 St. Georges, or Wakeryng's Chapel, near Bishop Goldwell’s tomb. 
 
 St. James the Greater and St. James the Less, commonly called Gold- 
 well’s chapel. 
 
 The Beauchamp Chapel, on the south side of the choir. 
 
 The chapels of Jesus, formerly belonging to the bishop, and that of St. 
 Luke, belonging to the prior, have been already noticed ; as well as Hey- 
 don’s on the south of the church, and St. Osyth’s and St. Stephen s on the 
 north side. Besides these chapels and altars, the sacrist annually accounted 
 for the composition-fees for interments in the church, for the offerings at 
 the three kings, at St. Eligius’s, at the great guild called St. George’s guild, 
 the dyers’ guild, and the worsted-weavers’ guild ; at the altar by the black 
 cross, of which a monk was chosen custos, or keeper; at the stump cross; 
 at the red cross; at St. Nicholas’s altar, where Nic. de Hindolveston was 
 buried in 1298; at St. Appolonia, at St. Gazian, St. John of Bridlington; > 
 at St. Catharine, at St. Petronel, or Parnell, at St. Ipolitus’s, at St. Leo- 
 degar, or Leiger; at St. Anthony, at St. Theobald, at. the charnel cross, 
 and at All Saints altars. Whence, observes Blomefield, “ we may see with 
 what number of altars, images, crosses and pictures the church was in 
 
HAVOCK IN THE CIVIL WARS:- 1643 . 
 
 45 
 
 those days filled. The prior was obliged to pay ten shillings a year to find 
 a wax taper burning at our Lord's sepulchre. There were certain annual 
 sums paid to the boy-bishop and his clerks, on St. Nicholas’ day, by all the 
 officers of the church.” The boy-bishop, or episcopus choristarum, appears 
 to have been chosen at this church, as well as that of Salisbury: some 
 account of whom has already been given in the history of that cathedral. 
 Blomefield supposes that the custom of electing a juvenile bishop among 
 the choristers was common to most of the cathedrals, and not peculiar to 
 those of Salisbury and Norwich. 
 
 In 1643 the church and adjoining palace and deanery were forcibly taken 
 possession of by the fanatics, and plundered of their plate and other valuable 
 articles. The sculpture, carving, organ, and other parts were either destroyed 
 or defaced, and almost every brass in the church was taken away. Bishop 
 Hall, in his “ Hard Measure ,” gives the following lamentable particulars of 
 the devastations committed in the church during the civil wars: “ It is 
 tragical to relate the furious sacrilege committed under the authority of 
 Linsey, Tofts the sheriff, and Greenwood ; what clattering of glasses, what 
 beating down of walls, what tearing down of monuments, what pulling 
 down of seats, and wresting out of irons and brass from the windows and 
 graves; what defacing of arms, what demolishing of curious stone-work, 
 that had not any representation in the w orld but of the cost of the founder 
 and skill of the mason; what piping on the destroyed organ-pipes; vest¬ 
 ments, both copes and surplices, together with the leaden cross which had 
 been newly sawed down from over the greenyard pulpit, and the singing 
 books and service books, were carried to the fire in the public market¬ 
 place ; a lewd wretch walking before the train in his cope trailing in the 
 dirt, with a service book in his hand, imitating in an impious scorn the tune, 
 and usurping the words of the litany. The ordnance being discharged on 
 the guild-day, the cathedral was filled with musketeers, drinking and tobac- 
 coning as freely as if it had turned alehouse.” Soon after the Reformation 
 part of these losses were reinstated. A new organ was raised by Dean 
 Crofts and the chapter, and the corporation of the city voted one hundred 
 pounds to purchase plate for the use of the altar. It does not appear that 
 
NORWICH CATHEDRAL. 
 
 4(5 
 
 any essential repairs or embellishments were then made in the church; but 
 in 1740 , Dean Bullock and the chapter caused the church to be cleaned and 
 white-washed, the nave and ailes to be new paved, and the tower to be sub¬ 
 stantially repaired. At the same time some considerable alterations were 
 made in the choir, and at the altar. These parts were however more effec¬ 
 tually altered in 1763 , when the floor of the former was new paved, the 
 stalls repaired and painted, and other improvements made. In June, 
 1801 , a tire broke out at the west end of the roof, when a great deal 
 of the timber-work was consumed, the lead melted, and the whole fabric 
 was in imminent danger. Fortunately the flames were checked before 
 they communicated to the transepts or ailes, and the stone vaulting was 
 protected from serious injury. The parts destroyed by this accident, arising 
 from negligence of workmen, were soon restored: and in 1806 nearly the 
 whole church was repaired, the stone roof washed over with one light 
 colour, and many improvements made in the appearance of the interior, 
 under the direction of the late Mr. Wilkins, architect. Although the 
 interior has been repeatedly repaired, and beautifled, as commonly termed, 
 the exterior architecture and masonry have been much neglected; and 
 nearly the whole surface displays a ragged, crumbled, and decayed appear¬ 
 ance. From the friable and loose quality of the stone, its surface is 
 shivered off in many places; and nearly all of the mouldings of the arches, 
 with the string courses, capitals, and bases, have lost their forms and fea¬ 
 tures. Had our ancient architects studied chemistry and the natural history 
 of rocks with as much care and zeal as church architecture, they would 
 have been more choice in the selection of stone, and we should not so 
 frequently have cause to deplore the destructive effects of weather on the 
 scientific and curious works of man.—In October, 1815 , some very judicious 
 repairs and restorations were making to the west front by Mr. Stone, an 
 architect of Norwich. 
 
 The diocess of Norwich extends over the counties of Norfolk and Suf¬ 
 folk, and also includes eleven parishes in Cambridgeshire. It is divided into 
 the four archdeaconries of Norfolk, Norwich, Sudbury, and Suffolk: and 
 these are again divided into about one thousand three hundred and fifty- 
 
STATUTES :-BISHOP'S PALACE. 
 
 47 
 
 three parishes. Bishop Parkhurst’s return to Queen Elizabeth in 1503 
 was different in some items. He stated that the diocess contained forty- 
 five deaneries: the archdeaconry of Norwich, two hundred and eighty-nine 
 parish churches: the archdeaconry of Norfolk, four hundred and two: that 
 of Suffolk, two-hundred and eighty-six; and Sudbury, two hundred and 
 twenty-eight. See Blomefield’s Norwich, i. 556. 
 
 In the second year of the reign of King Edward VI. a new charter or 
 grant was made respecting the cathedral of Norwich, in which it is 
 ordained that the dean is to be head of the chapter, which is to consist 
 of six prebendaries; who are styled as follows: 1. The prebend of the 
 chancellor of the church, or the sacrist’s prebend; 2. the treasurer’s pre¬ 
 bend ; 3. the precentor’s prebend; 4. the prebend of the archdeacon of the 
 cathedral church of Norwich ; 5. the prebend of Lynn ; and, 6. the prebend 
 of Yarmouth. The fourth of these is always united to the mastership of 
 Catherine-Hall in Cambridge; the rest are in the gift of the lord chan¬ 
 cellor. A chapter is held twice each year; and the following officers are 
 annually elected: a subdean, a treasurer, a commissary, and a proctor. The 
 dean appoints the chapter-clerk and auditor; as well as six petty, or minor 
 canons, a deacon, or reader of the gospels, one reader of the epistles, a 
 sacrist, a precentor, and a librarian. Here are likewise an organist, eight lay 
 clerks, or singing men, a master and eight choristers, a beadle, two vergers, 
 and two sub-sacrists, or bell-ringers. The government or constitution of 
 the church is fully laid down in a book of statutes, consisting of forty 
 chapters ; an analysis of which is given by Blomefield, vol. ii. p. 563— 9 . He 
 states that the statutes are “ to be read distinctly and plainly in the English 
 tongue in the chapter-house by the vice-dean, openly once a year, at four 
 times; all the ministers of the church being called together for that pur¬ 
 pose. Notwithstanding this reading few of the members of the church 
 know the statutes they are governed by; when Queen Elizabeth’s statutes 
 (as these and the statutes of all corporate bodies ought to be) were public 
 to all men, for then it was ordered that there should be four copies of 
 the statutes: one of which was always to be in the choir, chained to the 
 dean’s stall, and another was to be in the chapter-house, the third kept 
 
 G 
 
48 
 
 NORWICH CATHEDRAL. 
 
 safely among the evidences, and the fourth was to be in the treasurer’s 
 custody.” 
 
 On the north side of, and connected with the cathedral is the Bishops 
 Palace, a large and irregular edifice, built at various times and by different 
 prelates. Part of it, immediately attached to the north aile of the nave, bears 
 evident marks of being coeval with the oldest part of the church, and was 
 probably built by Bishop Herbert. This part is now used as a brewhouse, 
 and other out-offices: connected with which is a very large kitchen, with 
 spacious fire-places and other culinary appendages. The cellars, though 
 not under ground, have arched roofs, and other characteristics of ancient 
 architecture. At the eastern end of the palace is the Bishop’s Chapel, 
 which was erected by Bishop Reynolds, who found the previous chapel in 
 a state of dilapidation and ruin. Built and fitted up with wainscot sides, 
 and a stuccoed flat ceiling, in the style of the middle of the seventeenth 
 century, it has no claim to the attention or admiration of the architectural 
 antiquary. Near the altar is a monument to, with a bust of the founder, 
 who died July 28, 1676, aged sixty-six. His successor, Bishop Sparrow, 
 who died May 19, 1685, aged seventy-four, has also a monument here. 
 
 In the midst of the palace-garden, or lawn, is a curious and interesting 
 fragment of an ancient building, supposed to have been part of an old 
 palace erected by Bishop Salmon. This prelate obtained a license from 
 the king to enlarge the site of his palace, and, according to Blomefield, 
 rebuilt the whole of the “present house” upon a grand and spacious scale: 
 but this statement must be erroneous; for different portions of the palace 
 are evidently of different and remote periods. The great hall, built by 
 Salmon, is said to have been one hundred and ten feet in length by sixty 
 feet in width. Bishops Tottington, Lyhart, Goldwell, Parkhurst, and other 
 subsequent prelates, have all made alterations to the palace. Bishop Nyx, 
 in 1535, granted a lease for eighty-nine years to the mayor, sheriffs, and citizens 
 of Norwich, to hold the guild, or feast of St. George, in the palace, and to 
 make use of the buttery, pantry, and kitchen for fourteen days at the time of 
 the guild; unless the premises at that time should be inhabited by the king, 
 queen, or the bishop. Bishop Hall, after he came to the see, 1641, occupied 
 
PALACE COMBINATION SERMONS. 45) 
 
 the palace, and gives the following account of an occurrence in his time: 
 “ Sheriff Tofts and Alderman Lindsey, attended with many zealous fol¬ 
 lowers, came into my chapel to look for superstitious pictures and reliques 
 of idolatry ; and sent for me, to let me know they found those windows full 
 of images which were very offensive, and must be demolished. I told them 
 they were the pictures of some ancient and worthy bishops, as St. Ambrose, 
 St. Austin, &c. It was answered me, they were so many popes; and one 
 younger man among the rest (Townsend, as I perceived afterwards) would 
 take upon him to defend that every diocesan bishop was a pope. I 
 answered him with some scorn, and obtained leave that I might, with the 
 least loss and defacing of the windows, give order for taking off that 
 offence; which I did by causing the heads of the pictures to he taken off 6 , 
 since I knew the bodies could not offend.” Other insults and indignities 
 were soon afterwards committed towards the bishop and the church. In 
 1656, the bishop’s hall was used as a place of public meeting; and in June 
 of that year the following remarkable sentence was publicly pronounced 
 by Mr. Wayneford, a comber, and which was afterwards sworn to before 
 the court of mayoralty: he prayed, “that the Lord would be pleased to 
 throw down all earthly power, and rule, and authority, and that he would 
 consume them, that they be no more alive upon the earth; and that he 
 would set up the kingdom of his Son, that they might be all taught of 
 God.” Soon afterwards the hall was demolished, its leads sold, and other 
 parts of the palace greatly mutilated and neglected. Some rooms were let 
 out and fitted up as tenements for poor persons. In this state Bishop Rey¬ 
 nolds found it in 1660, when he came to the see, after the restoration of 
 Charles II.; and although he had previously preached against episcopacy, 
 he now eagerly supported its dignity, privileges, and general character. 
 
 In an open area, called the green-yard, on the north side of the church 
 and west of the palace, was a cross, at which the combination sermons were 
 preached in the summer before the epoch of the Reformation. At such 
 
 0 This occurrence accounts for the frequent appearance of headless stalues and mutilated 
 figures in painted windows. 
 
50 
 
 NORWICH CATHEDRAL* 
 
 times the mayor and aldermen, with their wives and officers, usually 
 attended, and had a covered seat or booth erected for them against the 
 palace; whilst the dean, prebendaries, and many higher classes of per¬ 
 sons were accommodated with galleries raised against the aile of the 
 church. The inferior classes assembled round the cross, some of whom 
 hired seats at a halfpenny or a penny each. The bishop and chancellor 
 attended at a window of the palace. These combination sermons were 
 much frequented : but when the church was sequestered the pulpit was 
 removed to the new-hall yard, and the sermons were preached there for 
 some time afterwards. They are now delivered in the cathedral church 
 every Sunday morning; and by a mandamus from the king, March 14, 
 1635, the mayor, sheriffs, justices, aldermen, and all other chief officers of 
 the city, were commanded to attend the sermons in the same manner as 
 is done by the mayor and city officers in London. 
 
 On the south side of the cathedral, but detached from it, is the Deanery- 
 house; which at present is a large pile of building of different dates, but 
 not any part of it is very ancient. Near the deanery are three insulated 
 columns and fragments of an old edifice, said to be parts of the monks' 
 dormitory and refectory. These columns, with their corresponding archi- 
 volt mouldings, were formerly painted and gilt. Plans, elevations, and 
 some account of them are published in the fifteenth volume of the Archaeo- 
 logia, by .T. A. Repton; also further essays by the Reverend W. Gibson, 
 and Frank Sayers, M. D. Mr. Gibson conjectures that the building con¬ 
 sists of Saxon materials and Saxon architectural members, removed from a 
 chapel founded anterior to the first bishop of Norwich: but Mr. J. A. Repton 
 and Dr. Sayers are satisfied in referring the work to Herbert’s age. With 
 deference to these gentlemen, I must dissent from them all; for I cannot 
 consider the style of architecture to be anterior to the age of King Stephen 
 or Henry II. The clustered columns, and small shafts with bands at the 
 centre, also the forms and ornaments of the capitals and bases, are all 
 indicative of a later time ; and are of a more decorated, light, and improved 
 character than the oldest parts of the choir, transept, or nave. 
 

 BIOGRAPHICAL ANECDOTES OF BISHOPS OF NORWICH, AND OF OTHER 
 PERSONS CONNECTED WITH ITS CHURCH. 
 
 Intending to subjoin, in a subsequent page, a regular chronological list 
 of the bishops of this see, with contemporary priors, deans, &c. I shall 
 only narrate a few characteristic anecdotes of such as may properly be 
 considered popular personages; or notice such events connected with their 
 respective lives and prelacy as are intimately connected with the church, 
 are illustrative of the customs of certain times, or tend to exemplify some 
 memorable trait in ecclesiastical history. Of Herbert, the first bishop, 
 some account has already been given. His tomb, “ above an ell high,” 
 originally placed before the high altar, was destroyed in the civil wars of 
 the seventeenth century, to make room for the mayor’s seat: a new altar- 
 tomb, however, was raised by the dean and prebends to his memory in 
 1682, on which is a long Latin inscription, by Dean Prideaux. 
 
 Eborard, the second bishop of Norwich, chaplain to the former bishop, 
 was advanced to this see after it had remained vacant three years. His 
 reign is distinguished by the persecution of the Jews, and the canonization 
 of the crucified boy. According to Henry of Huntingdon, he was deposed 
 for cruelty, and retired to Fountain’s Abbey in Yorkshire, 1145, where he 
 died in 1149, but his corpse was buried in his own cathedral. He divided 
 the archdeaconry of Suffolk into two archdeaconries, and founded the hos¬ 
 pital and church of St. Paul in Norwich. 
 
NORWICH CATHEDRAL. 
 
 William Turbus, prior of Norwich, was advanced to the see in U4G, 
 but soon again obliged to leave it, and return to the priory. Zealous in the 
 cause of Becket, Archbishop of Canterbury, he not only opposed the Earl 
 of Norwich and other distinguished characters, but in defiance of the king’s 
 prohibition, he excommunicated the said earl and others in his cathedral; 
 and afterwards called a synod of all his clergy to pronounce the same 
 sentence on Gilbert, Bishop of London, and other persons who had opposed 
 him. This conduct so incensed the king that the bishop deemed it neces¬ 
 sary to seek safety and protection in the sanctuary of his old priory. On 
 the evening of Christmas, 1173, as the monks went to vigils, they saw a 
 bright light in the sky, which continued all night, and occasionally appeared 
 with “ exceeding redness, like the morning sun ; so that our aurora borealis 
 are no new phenomena, as some modern philosophers would pretend 1 .” 
 Turbus dying in 1174, was buried near the tomb of Herbert. A seal of 
 him is affixed to an instrument of profession of Silvester, Abbot of St. 
 Austin’s in Canterbury, anno 1152. See Battely’s Cantab. No. 54, pt. 5, 
 cap.1. 
 
 John of Oxford was advanced from the deanery of Salisbury to this see 
 in 1175. Being one of the king’s chaplains, he strenuously opposed the 
 proceedings of Becket, and was therefore commissioned by his monarch to 
 visit the pope, and prefer complaints against the archbishop. In this busi¬ 
 ness he gave the king so much satisfaction, that his majesty prevailed on 
 the monks of Norwich to elect him their bishop. Soon afterwards he 
 exerted himself, in conjunction with the Bishop of Ely, to obtain the fol¬ 
 lowing privileges from the king in behalf of the clergy: “1. That no 
 spiritual person should be brought before any temporal judge personally, 
 except for temporal matters : 2. That no see or abbey should be kept void 
 in the king’s hands above one year: 3. That whoever slew a spiritual 
 person, and was convicted of it, should be punished as the temporal law 
 required, such offenders before being only excommunicated.” Henry the 
 
 ’ Blometield’s History of Norwich, i. 475, wherein it is stated that the same appearances are 
 noted in the chronicle of the guild-hall. 
 
BISHOPS OXFORD AND DE GREY : 1 175 TO 1200. 
 
 53 
 
 Second, in the twenty-sixth year of his reign, wishing to promote the just 
 and correct administration of the laws in his realm, appointed several 
 distinguished persons to act as justices; but finding these inefficient or 
 dishonest, next nominated the Bishops of Norwich, Ely, and Winchester 
 to act as principal justices. The church of the Holy Trinity in Ipswich 
 having been consumed by fire during the prelacy of this bishop, he rebuilt 
 and consecrated it, and also repaired its principal offices. He also repaired 
 part of his own cathedral, after it had been injured by fire, finished other 
 parts, and added “ all such ornaments as were then wanted.” He likewise 
 added some almshouses to the convent. According to Pitts, he was inde¬ 
 fatigable in his studies, and devoted much time to reading and writing 
 history. He is author of a “ History of the Kings of England ”—“ A 
 Defence of the King against Archbishop Bechet”—“An Account of his 
 Embassy to Sicily ,” and “ Epistles ancl Orations to Richard , Archbishop of 
 Canterbury 2 .” He was buried in the choir of the cathedral, on the north 
 side of Bishop Turbus. 
 
 John, the second, de Grey, Grai, or Grae, called the rich, was the 
 king’s chaplain, secretary, and justice itinerant, at the time of the last 
 bishop’s decease, and was consecrated, at Westminster, bishop of this see, 
 contrary to the remonstrance of the monks of Canterbury, who contended 
 that it was not legal to consecrate any bishop out of their own church. 
 Though disregarded at this time, they obtained a solemn charter in 1235, 
 from Edmund their archbishop, that “no bishop belonging to the jurisdic¬ 
 tion of Canterbury should afterwards be consecrated any where but there, 
 without their license.” Even before De Grey was fully admitted to the see, 
 he obtained a license to resume to his church of Norwich all manors, 
 lands, and churches which had been alienated by his predecessors to the 
 damage of the church. In 1201 he gave four thousand marks “ to have the 
 custody of the land and heir of Oliver D’Eyncourt, with his marriage with 
 the king’s consent, and without disparagement 3 .” In the same year he built 
 the palace, with its offices, at Gaywood, near Lynn. The king being very 
 
 See Bale, Cent. 3. a. 
 
 s Blomefield’s Norwich, vol. i. p. 479, from Rot. Pip. iii. Joh. 
 
54 
 
 NORWICH CATHEDRAL. 
 
 poor and wanting money in 1203, our rich prelate was applied to and 
 advanced a considerable sum, for which the monarch left the following 
 articles in pledge: the great crown, the gilt sword, the surcoat, cloak, 
 dalmatic, girdle, sandals, gloves, and spurs 4 . He was soon afterwards 
 appointed president of the council, and by the intervention of the king was 
 elected Archbishop of Canterbury in 1205. This was approved by the 
 pope, and confirmed by the English monarch ; yet the former soon changed 
 his mind, and wished to supplant De Grey by Stephen de Langton. A 
 contest arose between the partizans of each, and this contest is said to have 
 occasioned the civil wars of King John’s reign. From the same cause also 
 arose a serious quarrel between the king and the pope. Sir James Ware, 
 in his History, &c. of Ireland, records the name of our bishop, as lord 
 chief justice of that island; and it appears that he reformed the coin of 
 Ireland, by making it as heavy and fine as the English money. A chronicle 
 of Bury abbey relates that this prelate, in 1212, collected a large army, 
 and entering France took several castles. In the same year he accounted 
 for thirty-five knights’ fees that he held: and in 1213 he had an acquit¬ 
 tance by writ from the scutage of Scotland for forty-eight knights’ fees and 
 an half. After returning from Ireland, he was sent on an embassy to the 
 pope; and died on his return, at St. John de Angelo, October 18, 1214; 
 whence his corpse was conveyed to Norwich cathedral for interment. 
 Blomefield calls him “ a great historiographer, a great antiquarian, and 
 writer;” but we do not meet with any material works to entitle him to 
 these appellations. Pitts says he wrote a book entitled “ Schale Chronicon ,” 
 and a book of “Epistles” Thompson, in his preface to Jeffery of Monmouths 
 History, remarks that he wrote in defence of that work, against the stric¬ 
 tures of Will. Parvis, or Petil, who endeavoured to prove that King Arthur 
 was a fabulous person. See Nicholson’s Historical Library. 
 
 Pandulf, the sixth bishop, w'as advanced to this see at the instigation of 
 the pope, after it had remained void seven years. After the country had 
 been some time involved in civil wars between the king and his barons, 
 
 1 Rot. Pat. 5 Join M. (>. 
 
BISHOP PANDULF : 1222. 
 
 oo 
 
 Pandulf was sent to England as legate to appease the storm of civil discord. 
 This he effected, and produced a general peace; as a reward for which the 
 king prevailed on the monks of Norwich to elect him to their see in 1218. 
 Three years afterwards he returned to Rome, resigned his legateship, was 
 ordained priest, and then consecrated bishop in May, 1222. While at 
 Rome, he obtained a grant from the pope that he and his successors should 
 have all the first fruits of the clergy of the diocess; and which they con¬ 
 tinued to enjoy till Henry VIII. produced his grand ecclesiastical revolution. 
 It appears that many Italians were promoted to benefices in this diocess 
 during Pandulf’s sway. Versed in diplomacy, he was too cunning for our 
 monarch; and, according to most authors, was chiefly instrumental in pre¬ 
 vailing on the king to resign his crown and kingdom to the pope, “ to 
 become his vassal to his eternal infamy, and submit himself to Stephen 
 Langton and those prelates who had not only interdicted the realm, so that 
 for six years space all ecclesiastical sacraments, except baptism, confession, 
 and the viaticum, ceased; but also excommunicated the king, published the 
 pope’s deprivation of him from the crown, and instigated the French king 
 to invade the realm and usurp the crown 5 .” The same author states that 
 Pandulf “ died very rich, being of a very covetous disposition; for which 
 vice all his countrymen were very remarkable.” He is described as having 
 been a great benefactor to the monks, and among other things presented 
 them with a chest of relicks which he brought from Italy 0 . 
 
 s Blomefield, ut. sup. 483. 
 
 6 Blomefield gives the following account of, and comments on, the relicks of this church 
 at the time of the Reformation: “A multitude of cheats and counterfeits were then discovered; 
 among which was a portion of the blood of the blessed Virgin Mary; to w hich many came in 
 pilgrimage and made their offerings, for which the sacrist annually accounted. It is probable 
 this was something like the blood of Christ showed in those days at Hales in Gloucestershire, 
 which proved to be the blood of a duck, weekly renewed, to their no small gain. The image of 
 the holy Trinity, represented by a weak old man, was decorated with a gold chain of twenty- 
 five S.S. weighing eight ounces, which was presented by Lady Margaret Shelton in 1499. This 
 chain had four small jewels and one great jewel.with a red enamelled rose in gold hanging thereon. 
 The experience of the notorious and frequent delusion in relicks occasioned a cautious provision 
 in the council of Trent, that no relicks should be admitted or esteemed but such as were first 
 
 H 
 
56 
 
 NORWICH CATHEDRAL. 
 
 William de Raleigh, the ninth bishop, was in the singular situation of 
 being elected to the three bishopricks, at the same time, of Chester, Nor¬ 
 wich, and Winchester. The king, however, compelled the monks of the 
 last city to choose another bishop, and then gave Raleigh the choice of the 
 other two. The Winchester priests, not relishing the commands of the 
 monarch, persevered for four years in their efforts to obtain our bishop for 
 their see, and at last succeeded in direct opposition to royal authority and 
 pleasure. Holingshed, in his Chronicles, gives a full account of these events. 
 This bishop granted an indulgence of twenty days pardon, to such persons 
 of his diocess as contributed to the building of St. Paul's church in Lon¬ 
 don, as did also his successor, 
 
 Walter de Suffield, who in 1255 joined the Abbot of Peterborough 
 in collecting the tenths and other money paid by those who vowed to go to 
 the holy land, and were willing to redeem their vows for money. (See Ry- 
 mer’s Foedera, i. 603.) In the same year he drew up a description of the 
 value of all the church livings, &c. in England, by the command of Pope 
 Innocent. This being reduced to order, certified upon oath, and confirmed 
 by the pope in 1256, w as called the Norwich , or Waller s taxation, and was 
 afterwards used in all subsequent ratings of the clergy, &c. This prelate 
 built and endowed St. Giles’s hospital in Norwich, for the reception of 
 pilgrims, travellers, and poor people; and also built the lady chapel 
 already referred to. He was a strict devotee to all the rites and ceremonies 
 of the church of Rome; and hence, after death, his tomb was resorted to 
 by crowds of the common people, who attributed many miracles to it. 
 Increasing in holy fame, it was next esteemed a shrine, and visited by many 
 pilgrims. In the bishop's will, which is very copious, he bequeathed one 
 hundred pounds for his funeral expenses, and ordered that twenty-five 
 chaplains should be found in his diocess to celebrate mass for his soul, and 
 for the souls of his benefactors, for one year. He gave his great cup and 
 cupboard, “to reposite our Lord’s body in, and other relicks to the cathe- 
 
 approved by the bishop; which was only enforcing the decrees of the lateran council, that no 
 relicks should be worshipped but such as were stamped with the pope’s authority.” History of 
 Norwich, ii. 30. 
 
BISHOPS FROM 1260 TO 1299. 
 
 57 
 
 dral; also one hundred marks, the two horses that drew his body to the 
 grave, and all the furniture of his chapel, entire.” Among other items in 
 the will, he gives the following: To the king, one cup, one palfrey, and his 
 pack of hounds; to the poor scholars of Oxford, live pounds; to his brother, 
 William de Calthrop, all his armour, the line standing cup, and his emerald 
 ring; to William de Whitewell, the image of the Virgin, and his picture 
 drawn by Master Peter , two books of sermons, and his great girdle to gird 
 him when he grew old. If he died any distance from Norwich, he directed 
 that his heart might be taken out, and deposited in a cavity or closet made 
 in the wall near the high altar of St. Giles’s hospital. An analysis of this 
 will is given in Blomelield’s Norwich, i. 488, &c. The prelacy of 
 
 Roger de Skerning was noted for the depredations committed in the 
 city by the disinherited barons; who, on the 16th of December, 1266, 
 according to the Bury Registers, loaded seven score carriages with plunder, 
 and murdered many of the citizens. In the following February the king 
 visited the city, and held a council, when the barons were disinherited. 
 The years 1271 and 1272 were memorable in the annals of Norwich for 
 violent tempests and the warfare between the citizens and the monks, which 
 have been previously noticed. Dying at his manor-house of South Elmham, 
 Skerning was buried in the lady chapel, and was succeeded by 
 
 William de Middleton, who was one of the guardians of the realm, 
 during the residence of the king and queen in France in 1279. He was 
 made capital steward of the city of Bourdeaux in 1287; and returning to 
 England in the following year, died at his country seat of Terling in Essex. 
 He was also buried in the lady chapel. His successor, 
 
 Ralph de Walpole, on his consecration was advised by the arch¬ 
 bishop to relinquish “ the first fruits of the vacant benefices in his diocess, 
 as displeasing to God and man,” and readily consented. He began the 
 cloister as already noticed, and was promoted by the pope to Ely in 1299, 
 in opposition to the wishes of the monks of that house. 
 
 John Salmon was appointed by the pope to this see in 1299, and proved 
 an active and distinguished governor of the diocess. In 1303 he addressed 
 
NORWICH CATHEDRAL. 
 
 58 
 
 an hortatory letter to the people of his bishopric, urging them to con¬ 
 tribute to the repair of St. Paul's church in London. On the death of 
 Edward I. he received letters to pray for the health of the new monarch, 
 and prosperity to the kingdom; and soon afterwards was appointed one of 
 the ambassadors to demand Isabel, daughter of the French king, as queen 
 for Edward II. On January 18, 1307-8, he was summoned to attend the 
 coronation, and shortly after was deputed, with several English lords, to 
 wait on the pope. In 1316 he was again sent to his holiness at Avignon, to 
 pay one thousand marks pension for the kingdoms of England and Ireland. 
 One of this bishop’s letters is preserved in his own register at Norwich, 
 dated from York, and complaining that he was obliged to attend the parlia¬ 
 ment in that city, and thereby incur an “insupportable expense, and be 
 unable to visit his diocess.” Being highly in favour with the king and parlia¬ 
 ment, he was appointed chancellor of England in 13*20, and had the broken 
 fragments of the old great seal allowed him as his fee. After fulfilling the 
 duties of many distinguished offices, he died at Folkstone priory in Kent, 
 July 6, 1325, and his remains were conveyed for interment to his own 
 private chapel at Norwich. Besides this building, he erected the greater 
 part of the charnel chapel, the hall in the palace, and the north walk of the 
 cloister. 
 
 Robert de Baldock, the king’s chancellor, was elected by the monks, 
 and approved by the king, as the successor of Salmon; but the pope 
 refused his consent, having appointed one of his own friends. Baldock was 
 further persecuted by Prince Edward and Isabel, his mother, for favouring, 
 or being connected with Hugh de Spencer, “that hated minister;” and in 
 1326 was committed to Newgate, where he died of grief, and was interred 
 in St. Paul’s church, May 2, 1327. 
 
 William de Ayreminne, a great favourite of Edward II. was progres¬ 
 sively appointed by the pope to many ecclesiastical and civil offices, and at 
 length to the see of Norwich. Queen Isabel and Prince Edward having 
 the government of the kingdom, appointed our bishop the chancellor and 
 treasurer. In the fust year of Edward III. he obtained a license to enclose 
 
BISHOPS BECK AND BATEMAN: 1337 TO 1343. 
 
 59 
 
 and fortify his palaces and manor-houses with embattled stone walls. He 
 died at his palace at Charing, March 13, 1336, and was interred before the 
 high altar in his own cathedral. 
 
 Anthony de Beck, “an old courtier and retainer at the court of Rome,” 
 as Blomefield calls him, was appointed to this see by the pope, April 7, 1337, 
 although the chapter had previously elected Thomas de Hemenliale. Of an 
 arrogant disposition, he opposed the archbishop’s visitation; and when the 
 latter came to Norwich, he directed one of the monks to mount the pulpit, and 
 declare the archbishop’s visitation to be null and void. The king, incensed 
 at this procedure, ordered the sheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk to seize and 
 imprison such persons as assisted the bishop. The latter defied them, and 
 appealed to the court of Rome. He also tyrannised over the monks in a 
 cruel and intolerant manner, whence he obtained the hatred and contempt 
 of all. At length his oppressions became so unbearable that his own ser¬ 
 vants contrived to poison him, probably at the instigation of the monks, 
 December 19, 1343. He was the first bishop that had his own arms 
 engraved on the episcopal seal. 
 
 William Bateman was a native of Norwich, whence he was sent to Cam¬ 
 bridge, where he studied civil law, and obtained a doctor’s degree. Soon 
 afterwards going to Rome, he was so much favoured by the pope as to be 
 appointed auditor of the papal palace, and one of the chaplains. He was 
 advanced to the deanery of Lincoln in 1343, and appointed twice ambassador 
 from the pope, to make peace between the kings of France and England. 
 The see of Norwich being vacant at this time, the chapter unanimously 
 chose Bateman, and were surprised and pleased to find that the pope, who 
 had reserved that provision to himself, had also appointed the same person. 
 His presence at Norwich was greeted with strong demonstrations of joy. 
 In 1345 he proceeded to visit the prior, chapter, and the whole diocess; and 
 at the same time insisted on visiting the abbey of Bury, which involved him 
 in much trouble, and subjected him to the penalty of thirty talents of gold, 
 or ten thousand pounds. This cause occasioned much litigation; for the 
 Abbot of Bury had the law on his side, and the bishop was supported by the 
 king: but the subject, after many trials, was left undecided. This prelate 
 
60 
 
 NORWICH CATHEDRAL. 
 
 has rendered his name eminent in the academic annals of Cambridge, by 
 founding and endowing Trinity Hall in that university, in the year 1347. 
 This was at first chiefly designed to provide clergy for his own diocess; 
 in which a pestilential disease had occasioned the deaths of many persons 
 about that time. It is singular that two other colleges in Cambridge are 
 called Norfolk colleges; viz. Bene’t, or Corpus Christi, and Gonville-and- 
 Caius 7 . This prelate obtained from Pope Clement VI. a confirmation of the 
 first fruits to the see, in opposition to the clergy. He gave to the high altar 
 of his church one large image of the Holy Trinity, of massy silver gilt, to 
 be placed in a shrine or tabernacle; and another small image, with relicks 
 of twenty pounds weight. Attached to the regulars, he made appropria¬ 
 tions to no less than forty of them within his diocess. Being sent on an 
 embassy by the king, with Henry, Duke of Lancaster, to the pope, he died 
 at Avignon, and was buried in the cathedral there with great state; his 
 funeral being attended by many cardinals, archbishops, and bishops, and 
 other great, men. On his oblong seal is his effigy, with his own coat of 
 arms under his feet. 
 
 Thomas Percy, the youthful bishop, of illustrious descent and con¬ 
 nexions, was advanced to this see at the age of twenty-two, by the sole 
 authority of the pope and co-operation of the king, although in direct oppo¬ 
 sition to the monks. At first he opposed and harassed the latter, but soon 
 found it expedient to live on good terms with them. Contrary to the 
 former prelate, he favoured the secular clergy whenever opportunity 
 occurred. In 1361 he advanced four hundred pounds towards rebuilding 
 the steeple or spire ; and dying in 1369, he was interred before the rood-loft 
 in his own cathedral. 
 
 Henry de Spencer, called the warlike bishop of Norwich, was appointed 
 by the pope to the vacant see. Bred -up with his brother Spencer, who 
 commanded in the pope’s wars, he was a soldier in his youth, and in dif¬ 
 ferent stages of his life showed that he had a skilful head and a courageous 
 
 7 See Dyer’s “ Account of the Colleges and Halls, &c. of Cambridge,”—Harraden’s “ Canta- 
 brigia depicta,”—and Lysons’s “ Cambridgeshire,” in the “ Magna Britannia.” 
 
BISHOP DE spencer: 1370. 
 
 61 
 
 heart. Godwin and some other writers represent him as “ breathing- 
 nothing but war and armsand also remark that he continued at variance 
 with the monks for fifteen years, who were then forced to give him four 
 hundred marks to secure their privileges, &c.; whence the monks have 
 neglected to notice him among their accounts of bishops: Cotton only 
 mentions his name. This, however, is not very surprising when it is 
 remembered that he particularly favoured the secular clergy, and not only 
 slighted but opposed the regulars. Capgrave, in his life of this bishop, 
 (Wharton’s An. Sa. ii. 359) characterizes him as “generous, charitable, and 
 cheerful.” Whatever may have been the natural disposition and habits of 
 our bishop, it is evident that he lived in times of civil discord and foreign 
 warfare. Not long after he was seated on the episcopal throne, the popu¬ 
 lace, called the commons of the country, assembled in great numbers, 
 opposed the civil power, and committed numerous acts of rapine and 
 plunder. On this occasion Bishop Spencer actively, intrepidly, and skil¬ 
 fully opposed the mob; and by his personal prowess first routed them, and 
 then entirely suppressed the insurrection 8 . He was still more distin¬ 
 guished in the continental wars, when Pope Urban VI. was contending 
 against Clement VII. called the anti-pope, and Richard II. against the 
 French king. Espousing the causes of Urban and of Richard, the bishop 
 zealously exerted himself in raising money and riches of all kinds, as well 
 as men. The whole nation eagerly came forward; for they were taught to 
 believe they should secure salvation, if not success, by fighting for his imma¬ 
 culate holiness. The pope’s bulls declared that all persons who went with 
 the bishop, or contributed towards the expense of the expedition, should 
 have the same indulgences and pardons as those w ho engaged in the crusade 
 to the holy land. After much fighting, and the seizure of nearly all Flan¬ 
 ders, the bishop returned home, in consequence of the jealousy and machi¬ 
 nations of the Duke of Lancaster. He was impeached in parliament, in 
 four charges by the chancellor, but answered them with firmness in person. 
 
 6 See Blomefield’s Norwich, i. 110, &c.; also Holingshed’s Chronicle, Froissart’s Chro¬ 
 nicle, &c. 
 
62 
 
 NORWICH CATHEDRAL. 
 
 This pontifical war is said to have cost no less than thirty-seven thousand 
 four hundred and seventy-five pounds seven shillings and sixpence, besides 
 large gifts and aids. In 1387, the bishop obtained a license to embattle 
 or “ kernellare ” his manor-houses at Elmham and Gaywood. A decided 
 enemy to the lollards, he persecuted them on many occasions; and among 
 his arbitrary acts was that of imprisoning Sir Thomas Erpingham, and 
 compelling him to erect the elegant gate-house, at the west end of the 
 church, which has been already described. 
 
 Alexander de Tottington, prior, was elected by the monks in 1407, 
 but the king so much disapproved of him as to imprison him in Windsor 
 castle for nearly a year. The city, however, in a public assembly, addressed 
 a letter to the king, and another to the pope, in behalf of the prior, urging 
 the wishes of the whole diocess. The monarch submitted, and the bishop, 
 after being confirmed in his chair, expended a good deal of money in 
 repairing the palace and manor-houses of his diocess. Dying in old age, 
 in April, 1413, he was buried in the lady chapel. 
 
 Richard Courtenay, of the Devonshire family, was in high favour with 
 King Henry V.; and by him employed in different embassies and public 
 offices. He was at the siege of Harfleur, where he died in September, 
 1415, and his remains were conveyed to, and interred among the kings in 
 Westminster abbey church. See “ Genealogical History of the Courtenay 
 Family,” fob 1735,—and Prince’s “ Worthies of Devon.” 
 
 John de Wakeryng, born at Wakering in Essex, was one of the privy 
 council to King Henry VIv lord privy seal, and lord keeper of the great 
 seal, before he was advanced to the see of Norwich. Immediately after 
 installation, he constituted John, Archbishop of Smyrna, his suffragan, 
 with full powers “ to consecrate and reconcile, or re-consecrate churches, 
 churchyards, altars, cups, patins, corporals, vessels, vestments, and other 
 ornaments, and to confirm and confer the clerical tonsure on learned men, 
 and to ordain to all orders, during the bishop’s pleasure.” About this time 
 there was a great struggle for the papal see by three different persons, who 
 preferred their respective claims to the pontifical throne. A council was 
 called at Constance to settle this dispute; when many of the English uobi- 
 
BISHOPS FROM 1425 TO 1445. 
 
 03 
 
 lity, clergy, and gentry, to the amount of eight hundred, were deputed to 
 attend the meeting. Bishop Wakeryng was one of the number, and was 
 nominated with five others to elect the pope. Martin V. was chosen ; and 
 the conduct and ability of Wakeryng excited the approbation of the 
 assembly, and induced the pope to ratify his confirmation and consecration 
 free of expense. Though our prelate obtained the character of “a pious, 
 chaste, bountiful, and affable person,” yet he was intolerant towards the 
 lollards, and carried his persecution to a great extent. He built a covered 
 way, or cloister from the palace to the north transept, also a chapter-house; 
 and after governing the see nine years, died in 1425, and was buried on the 
 south side of the altar-steps. 
 
 William Alnwyk, or Alnwyke, a native of Alnwyc in Northumber¬ 
 land, was appointed the first confessor and priest to the nunnery of Sion, 
 Middlesex; and was afterwards made keeper of the privy seal, and confessor 
 to Henry VI. After being installed in Norwich cathedral, December 22, 
 142G, he directed his attention to the repairs and embellishment of his 
 church and palace; and built the western door-way, with a window, &c. to 
 the former, and commenced a tower gate-way to the latter. He presided 
 here ten years, and was then translated to Lincoln; where, and at Cam¬ 
 bridge, he is said to have executed some architectural works. During the 
 prelacy of 
 
 Thomas Browne, who sat from September, 1436, to December, 1445, the 
 citizens opposed the monks and bishop, and the prior had a dispute with 
 the prelate, which was referred to the pope. The prior, however, finding 
 himself in the wrong, sought for pardon, and engaged in future to add the 
 new honour of censing the bishop whenever he officiated in the cathedral 
 in his pontificalibus. At the death of Browne, John Stanbery, confessor to 
 Henry VI. was chosen bishop; but William de la Pole, earl of Suffolk, 
 opposed the consecration, and had sufficient interest with the pope to pro¬ 
 cure the appointment of his chaplain, 
 
 Walter Lyhart, or Hart, who by amiable and conciliating conduct 
 ingratiated himself so much with the citizens, as to obtain their esteem 
 and reconcile all differences between them and the clergy. In 1449 he 
 
 i 
 
NORWICH CATHEDRAL. 
 
 64 
 
 received the king- at his palace. He is said to have supported twelve 
 students in the university of Cambridge, and contributed very materially 
 towards the paving of his church, roofing the nave, and building the rood- 
 loft screen in the same, near which his remains were interred, May, 1472. 
 
 James Goldwell, dean of Salisbury, 1463, president of St. Georges’- 
 hall, Oxford, prothonotary to the pope, and ambassador to the court of 
 Rome from Edward IV. was consecrated Bishop of Norwich, October 4, 
 1472. A native of Chart, in King, he is recorded to have materially 
 repaired, if not rebuilt, the church at that place, and founded and endowed 
 a chantry chapel on its south side. Before he left Rome he obtained of 
 the pope an indulgence , to last for ever, towards repairing and adorning the 
 cathedral church, which had been much injured by fire, in 1463. This 
 papal mandate promised that every person who annually made offerings to 
 the cathedral on Trinity Sunday and Lady-day should have twelve years 
 and forty days of pardon: and which temptation seems to have produced 
 the desired effect, as the sacrist annually accounted for the offerings from 
 Bishop Goldwell’s indulgence. After coming to the see, this prelate 
 received from the executors of his predecessor a mitre, a crosier, and two 
 thousand two hundred marks for dilapidations, with which money he 
 repaired and adorned the tower; and adding more from his own purse 
 paid for the new stone roof to the choir, and for the new chantry chapels 
 on the side of the altar-steps. After making his will, at Hoxne, June 10, 
 1497, he died in the following February, and his corpse was interred under 
 his own altar-tomb, which had been probably raised before his death, as it 
 is not noticed in his will. Christopher Urswyke , dean of Windsor, was 
 proffered the see of Norwich after Goldwell, but refusing, 
 
 Thomas Jan, or Jane, was promoted to it in 1499, but died in the following 
 year, when 
 
 Richard Nix, or Nykke, the blind bishop , was appointed ; who, accord¬ 
 ing to Blomefield, w as “ a man of bad character and vicious life.” Godwin 
 says he “ ought to be marked with a black coal for his lustsand Fox 
 shows that five persons were doomed to pass the fiery ordeal in his time, 
 and by his sentence. Though he had by a solemn oath renounced the 
 
BISHOPS NIX AND RUGG : 1500 TO 153G. 
 
 65 
 
 pope’s supremacy in order to preserve his bishopric, yet he kept up a secret 
 correspondence with the'court of Rome; for which he was sentenced to 
 be imprisoned in the Marshalsea; where he remained a long time, and at 
 length obtained his liberation by engaging to pay a fine of ten thousand 
 marks. Unable however to raise this sum, “ he leased out many of the 
 revenues of the see for long terms, at small reserved rents 9 .” The cathedral 
 suffering much by fire in 1509, Bishop Nix repaired it, and built the stone 
 roofs of the north and south transepts. For extending his jurisdiction 
 over the Mayor of Thetford, he was sentenced to pay a fine, with which it 
 is related that the splendid painted glass in the windows of King’s-college 
 chapel was bought. Blind, decrepid, oppressed with cares and troubles, 
 and worn down with old age, he resigned his life and see, January 14, 1535, 
 and was buried between two piers on the south side of the nave of his 
 own cathedral, where a low and broad tomb covers his remains. 
 
 William Rugg, or Reppes, was a fellow of Gonville-hall, Cambridge, 
 when Henry VIII. sought the sanction of that university for his divorce 
 from Queen Catherine; and in this unmanly and infamous cause our priest 
 exerted himself so much to the satisfaction of the murderous monarch, that 
 he was rewarded with the Norwich mitre, May, 1536. An act of parlia¬ 
 ment was first passed to separate the barony and revenues from the see, 
 and annex them to the priory of Hickling. The barony and revenues of 
 the abbey of Holm were however granted to the see, under the Specious 
 pretext of being more beneficial; and in right of this barony the Bishop of 
 Norwich takes a seat in the house of peers as abbot of Holm. By this act 
 Abbot Rugg was nominated to the see, as a man eminently “qualified for 
 all the important and responsible duties of that office.” During his abbacy 
 he granted long leases, corrodies, annuities, and pensions, and thus greatly 
 injured the revenues; so that after taking possession of the half-ruined see, 
 and assuming the state and style of his predecessors, he soon exhausted his 
 money and credit. The gentry of the diocess complained of these pro¬ 
 ceedings to the king, Edward VI. who, in 1549, induced the bishop to 
 
 9 Blomefield’s Norwich, i. 545. 
 
66 
 
 NORWICH CATHEDRAL. 
 
 resign his see for an annuity of two hundred pounds. Not merely a sub¬ 
 missive tool to a vicious king, but dishonest in his intercourse with society, 
 and cruelly persecuting in religious matters, he was properly satirized and 
 despised while living, and his degradation and death contemplated without 
 pity or regret. 
 
 Thomas Thirlby, the first and last bishop of Westminster, was advanced 
 from that to Norwich by Edward VI. in April, 1550; and after espousing 
 the principles of Queen Mary, was promoted by her to Ely in September, 
 J554 10 . The same queen appointed her chaplain, 
 
 John Horton, to Norwich, who had been prior of the black friars at 
 Oxford; and who, bred up with the monks, proved himself, when vested 
 with power, a cruel and despotic persecutor of the Protestants. Several 
 persons were burnt as heretics at Norwich during this bishop’s dominion. 
 
 John Parkhurst, the preceptor of Bishop Jewell, and with him an 
 exile during the cruel and persecuting reign of Mary, was elected to this 
 see in 1560. At Oxford he was more distinguished for poetry and oratory 
 than for divinity; and published some specimens of his talents in the first. 
 Residing a good deal at his palace at Norwich, he is represented as having 
 “beautified and repaired it.” He died February 2, 1574, and was buried 
 on the south side of the nave, where a monument, deprived of brasses and 
 inscription, is still remaining. By the command of Queen Elizabeth, our 
 bishop made a return of the extent of the diocess, with its number of 
 archdeaconries, deaneries, parishes, &c. 
 
 Edmund Freke, who according to Archbishop Parker, was “a serious, 
 learned, and pious man,” was promoted from the see of Rochester to this 
 of Norwich in 1575, where he remained only three years, when he was 
 translated to Worcester. 
 
 Edmund Scambler was raised from Peterborough to Norwich by the 
 favour and interest of Queen Elizabeth. Previous to this, he granted her 
 the hundred of Nassaburgh, with its liberties and other church property; 
 and pursued the same conduct at Norwich, by which he impoverished both 
 
 See Bentlmm’s History, &c. of Ely. 
 
 10 
 
BISHOPS FROM 1602 TO 1619. 
 
 67 
 
 sees. For the former he was obliged to account. He continued to preside 
 here till 1594, when he died at Norwich, and was interred on the south 
 side of the nave; where a monument was raised to his memory, but which 
 was destroyed in the rebellion. 
 
 John Jeggon, a native of Coggeshall in Essex, president of Queen’s- 
 college in Cambridge, master of Bene’t-college for twelve years, and four 
 times vice-chancellor of the same university, was advanced by the influence 
 of Queen Elizabeth to this see in January, 1602. He is generally described 
 as being both grave and facetious, and zealous in enforcing a strict con¬ 
 formity to the established worship; also covetous and regardless of the 
 distresses of the poor. His palace at Ludham was burnt down with all its 
 furniture, books, &c.; and a poet of the time accuses the bishop of being 
 instrumental in the act: 
 
 “ Our short fat lord Bishop of Norfolk ’twas he 
 
 That caused that great fire at Ludham to be.” 
 
 Soon afterwards he bought an estate at Aylsham, and built a new mansion 
 there, where he died, March 13, 1617, and was buried in the chancel of the 
 parish church, where a monument was raised, with his effigy. 
 
 John Overall, a native of Hadleigh in Suffolk, a master of Catherine- 
 hall, Cambridge, a distinguished controversial writer, and Dean of St. 
 Paul’s, London, was promoted to the see of Lichfield and Coventry in 
 1614, and thence to Norwich in 1618, which he lived to govern only one 
 year. He was buried on the south side of the choir, near the altar-steps. 
 
 Samuel Harsnet, born at Colchester, was master of Pembroke-hall, 
 Cambridge, of which university he was twice vice-chancellor, and advanced 
 to Chichester in 1609, whence he was translated to Norwich, 1619. Here 
 he was beloved for his affability, eloquence, and hospitality; also for repair¬ 
 ing and occupying the old palace at Ludham, which had been deserted by 
 his predecessor. At that place he built a new domestic chapel, and 
 repaired and adorned the parish church. Zealous in adhering to, and 
 enforcing the ceremonies of the church, he was equally zealous in opposing 
 the popish priests and their doctrines. He presided at Norwich till Novem¬ 
 ber, 1628, when he was translated to the episcopal see of York. 
 
NORWICH CATHEDRAL. 
 
 68 
 
 Francis White, a native of St. Neot’s in Huntingdonshire, was preferred 
 to the deanery of Carlisle, in 1622, by King James I. While in this office 
 he engaged in a warm controversy with some Roman Catholic priests, and 
 part of his writings have been published. From the deanery he was elected 
 to the see of Carlisle, in 1626, and translated thence to that of Norwich, 
 1628. He was again removed to Ely, 1631 u . 
 
 Richard Corbet, a native of Ewell in Surry, was successively Bishop 
 of Oxford and of Norwich; and was justly respected when living, and 
 honoured after death, for talents, integrity, and moral worth. Corbet was 
 a distinguished wit in an age of wits, and a liberal man amongst a race of 
 intolerant partizans. Gilchrist remarks that “ our amiable prelate had not 
 a grain of persecution in his disposition. Benevolent, generous, and 
 spirited in his public character; sincere, amiable, and affectionate in pri¬ 
 vate life; correct, eloquent, and ingenious as a poet; he appears to have 
 deserved and enjoyed through life the patronage and friendship of the great, 
 and the applause and estimation of the good.” Such a character fixes on 
 our affections, and awakens sympathy in his behalf. We anxiously seek an 
 acquaintance with him and his works. The events of his life have not 
 been very fully narrated. Gilchrist, with his usual acuteness and diligence, 
 sought in vain for materials 12 . From his brief, but neat memoir the follow¬ 
 ing facts are derived : After receiving his juvenile education at Westmin- 
 ster-school, young Corbet was sent to Oxford; where he first entered at 
 Broadgate-hall, and afterwards at Christ-church. “ In 1605 he proceeded 
 master of arts, and became celebrated as a wit and a poet.” On the 
 death of “ the amiable and accomplished Henry, Prince of Wales,”—“ the 
 expectancy and rose of the fair state,” Corbet, then one of the proctors, 
 was deputed to pronounce a funeral oration; and, to use the words of 
 Antony Wood, “very oratorically speeched it in St. Marie’s church, before 
 a numerous auditory 13 .” The same garrulous writer also remarks that 
 
 11 See Bentham’s History, &c. of Ely. 
 
 ja See Poems, by Richard Corbet; with Notes and a Memoir, by Octavius Gilchrist, F. S. A. 
 8vo. 1807. 
 
 " Annals of Oxford, edited by Glitch, vol. ii. p. 312. 
 
BISHOP CORBET : 1632. 
 
 69 
 
 Corbet “ became a quaint preacher, and therefore much followed by inge¬ 
 nious men.” Among the friends and patrons our poet obtained, was Villiers, 
 Duke of Buckingham, who was stabbed by Felton in 1628, and whose 
 loss must have been severely felt by Corbet, had he not about that time 
 been deeply engaged and interested in an event of great importance to 
 himself. This was his promotion to the bishopric of Oxford, July 30, 1629; 
 but he remained there only a short time, being translated to Norwich, April, 
 1632. Abbot, Archbishop of Canterbury, dying soon afterwards, Laud 
 was nominated his successor, and immediately applied himself to reform 
 abuses in the church, and establish an uniformity of religious worship. 
 Accordingly he addressed instructions, among others, to Corbet; who 
 “ certified that he had suppressed the lectures of some factious men.” To 
 Mr. Ward, of Ipswich, who had appeared before the high commission for 
 words used in some of his sermons, but who was afterwards restored to 
 favour and to his cure, our bishop wrote the following letter; which serves 
 to characterize his style and sentiments. 
 
 “my worthie friend, 
 
 “ I thank God for your conformitie, and you for your acknowledgment : 
 Stand upright to the church wherein you live; be true of heart to her 
 governours; think well of her significant ceremonyes; and be you assured 
 I shall never displace you of that room which I have given you of my affec¬ 
 tion : prove you a good tenant in my hart, and noe minister in my diocese 
 hath a better landlord. Farewell! God Almightie blesse you with your 
 whole congregation. From your faithful friend to serve you in Christ 
 Jesus, “ Rich. Norwich. 
 
 “ Ludham Hall, the 6th of Oct. 1G33.” 
 
 The Dutch and Walloon congregations being numerous and long settled 
 in Norwich, the latter had obtained the use of the Virgin Mary chapel. 
 Corbet repeatedly warned them to quit this place; and in December, 1634, 
 wrote a peremptory letter to them, saying, “You have promised me from 
 time to time to restore my stolen bell, and to glaze my lattice windows. 
 
70 
 
 NORWICH CATHEDRAL. 
 
 After three years consultation (bysides other pollution) I see nothing mended, 
 Your discipline, I know, care not much for a consecrated place, and anye 
 other roome in Norwiche, that hath but bredth and length, may serve your 
 turne as well as the chappel: wherefore I say unto you, without a miracle, 
 Lazare, prodi fonts! depart, and hire some other place for your irregular 
 meetings,” &c. &c.—St. Paul’s church in London having been nearly con¬ 
 sumed by fire in Queen Elizabeth’s reign, great exertions were now made to 
 restore it; and Corbet not only contributed one hundred pounds, but gave 
 money to some poor ministers to subscribe, in order to excite the donations 
 of their wealthier brethren. He also addressed a persuasive and satirical 
 letter to the clergy of his diocess, beginning thus : “ Saint Paul’s church !— 
 One word in behalf of St. Paul; he hath spoken many in ours: he hath raised 
 our inward temples ; let us help to requite him in his outward. We admire 
 commonly those things which are oldest and greatest; old monuments and 
 high buildings do affect us above measure: and what is the reason ? 
 Because what is oldest cometh nearest God for antiquity, and what is 
 greatest comes nearest his works in spaciousness and magnitude.” Before 
 any thing was done to the church our good bishop died, July 28, 1635, and 
 was interred near the altar-steps in the cathedral. 
 
 Matthew Wren, after passing through several honorary and lucrative 
 appointments in colleges and churches, was made Dean of Windsor, July 
 24, 1628; Bishop of Hereford, March, 1633-4; and in 1635 was translated 
 thence to Norwich. After presiding here almost three years, he was pro¬ 
 moted to Ely, April 24, 1638. According to the account in the “ Parentalia,” 
 he was very active at Norwich in “detecting impostures, restraining the 
 restless and seditious, and breaking the spirits of all refractory schismatics.” 
 A decided enemy to the Presbyterians, or Puritans, he at length suffered 
 severely by their influence during the dominion of Cromwell; and, accord¬ 
 ing to Prynne, was doomed to sustain nearly eighteen years imprisonment 
 in the Tower. One of their charges against him was for causing a figure 
 of the crucifixion to be engraven on the episcopal seal, besides the arms of 
 the see. See “Parentalia, or Memoirs of the Family of the Wrens;” 
 folio. 1750. 
 
BISHOPS MONTAGUE AND HALL: 1638 TO 1641. 71 
 
 Richard Montague, or Mountagu, was a scholar of Eton and King’s 
 colleges, and promoted to the deanery of Hereford, December 9, 1616, 
 and to the see of Norwich, May, 1638. He did not however live long to 
 enjoy this dignity, but died in April, 1641, and was buried in the choir of 
 the cathedral. Montague was distinguished by some literary works, which 
 attracted the attention and approbation of King James I. particularly his 
 “ Diatribes upon the first Part of Seldens History of Tithes .” In this 
 work he convicts* Selden of some errors, and of neglecting to acknowledge 
 his authorities. Soon afterwards he published his animadversions on the 
 Annals of Baronins, in folio. In a subsequent part of his life he became 
 involved in religious controversy; wrote some essays with warmth and 
 severity, and was consequently attacked by opponents with equal rigour. 
 This literary war was so determined and popular, that the king, lords, and 
 commons were all engaged in it. Montague was ordered to appear at the 
 bar of the lower house in June, 1625, when he was committed to the 
 custody of the sergeant at arms, and obliged to give a security in two 
 thousand pounds for his future appearance. The monarch, with some 
 bishops and nobles, however, interfered in his behalf; and his friends so 
 far prevailed over his enemies, that he was soon rewarded with a mitre. 
 Fuller says, “his great parts were attended with tartness of writing; very 
 sharp the nib of his pen, and much gall in the ink 15 .” 
 
 Joseph Hall, a truly eminent, learned, and estimable member of the 
 English church, was a native of Ashby-de-la-Zouch in Leicestershire, 
 where he was born, July 1 , 1574. In an early stage of life, as well as in 
 old age, Hall experienced many difficulties and troubles. Straightened in 
 circumstances, and with a family of twelve children, the father of Joseph 
 was unable to afford him that school and university education which the 
 latter eagerly wished for. His elder brother and some friends, however, 
 caused him to be sent to Emanuel-college, Cambridge; but he was soon 
 recalled to fill the office of schoolmaster in his native town. Other efforts 
 were now adopted by friends to send him again to college, with the view of 
 
 15 Fuller’s Church History,—Biographia Britannica,—and Chalmers’ Gen. Biog. Diet. 
 
 K 
 
72 
 
 NORWICH CATHEDRAL. 
 
 obtaining a fellowship; in the contest for which Joseph again experienced 
 great obstacles. After continuing about seven years at college, he was 
 presented to the rectory of Halstead in Suffolk, and soon afterwards mar¬ 
 ried a daughter of Sir George Winnif. In 1605 he accompanied Sir Edmund 
 Bacon to the Spa, and to other places on the continent. During this tour 
 he composed his “ Second Century of Meditations,” became acquainted 
 with Coster, the famous Jesuit, and examined the practices and principles 
 of the Roman Catholic clergy. Returning home, he was soon appointed to 
 the donative living of Waltham-holy-Cross in Essex; was made chaplain to 
 Prince Henry, and took his degree as doctor of divinity. He was next pre¬ 
 ferred to a prebendal stall in the collegiate church of Wolverhampton. In 
 1616 the deanery of Worcester was conferred on him, and in the following 
 year he attended the king into Scotland as one of his chaplains. In con¬ 
 junction with three other learned and distinguished English divines, Dr. 
 Hall was chosen to attend the synod of Dort, in 1618, to decide a contro¬ 
 versy which had long prevailed between the Calvinists and Arminians 
 respecting the five points. His health not allowing him to remain long at 
 Dort, he took his leave of the synod in a Latin sermon, which was much 
 approved, and for which he was presented with a handsome gold medal. 
 The bishopric of Gloucester was offered to, but refused by Dr. Hall in 
 1624. Three years afterwards he accepted that of Exeter, and was trans¬ 
 lated thence to Norwich in 1641. In the December of that year he joined 
 the Archbishop of York and eleven other prelates in a public protest 
 against the validity of such laws as were made during their compelled 
 exclusion from parliament. This proceeding provoked the hostility of the 
 House of Commons, who commanded the bishops to be arrested and sent 
 to the Tower. They were soon afterwards impeached for high treason; 
 and, on their appearance in parliament, were treated with great indignity 
 and contempt. Bishop Hall was however released on giving security for 
 five thousand pounds, and immediately retired to Norwich and resumed 
 his duties. He frequently preached to crowded congregations, and con¬ 
 tinued unmolested till April, 1643; when the ordinance for sequestering 
 notorious delinquents having passed, our prelate w as specified by name: his 
 
BISHOP HALL. 
 
 73 
 
 rents were stopped, his palace entered, all his property, real and personal, 
 was seized, and himself treated with insulting brutality. The soldiery 
 and mob plundered the palace and cathedral, broke the windows, and 
 committed the most wanton and mischievous ravages. The good bishop at 
 length retired to the quiet village of Heigham, near Norwich, where he 
 continued to exercise the duties of pastor, and lived in comparative ease 
 and serenity till September, 1656, when he resigned his life, in the eighty- 
 second year of his age, and was interred in the chancel of the church. 
 
 During his long and active life he wrote and published many works, 
 which have been printed at different times in folio, quarto, and octavo: 
 but the whole have been recently collected, arranged, and uniformly re¬ 
 printed in ten volumes, octavo, under the judicious editorship of the Rev. 
 Josiah Pratt, who has preceded the whole with an ample memoir of the 
 author. Bishop Hall lived in an age of discord and trouble; when mens 
 minds were occupied by religious and political speculation, and when 
 infatuation and bigotry usurped the seat of judgment and discretion. 
 Hence moderation and liberalty were crimes to be persecuted by men of 
 ' power and men of strength; and Hall became one of the sufferers. Unfor¬ 
 tunately for himself, but fortunately for posterity, he lived in such times: 
 was a noble example of fortitude and talent, and thus became an exemplary 
 pattern to his contemporaries and to posterity. His poetry is characterized 
 by YVarton as “nervous and elegant,” and his prose is sententious, vigorous, 
 and perspicuous. In moral writing he has been called “ the Christian 
 Seneca.” 
 
 Edward Reynolds, a native of Southampton, was consecrated bishop 
 of this see, January 6, 1660. After taking his degree of M. A. at Oxford, 
 where he was famed for his skill in the Greek language and for preaching, 
 he joined the Presbyterian party in the rebellion of 164*2, was one of the 
 assembly of divines, and distinguished himself by frequently preaching in 
 London, and sometimes before the long parliament. He succeeded Dr. 
 Fell as Dean of Christ-church, and was made Vice-Chancellor of Oxford. 
 Obtaining the favour of Charles II. he was appointed Master of Merton- 
 college preparatory to his advancement to this see. Wood (Athen. Oxon.) 
 
74 
 
 NORWICH CATHEDRAL. 
 
 accuses him of deserting his party for preferment. Blomeffeld, however, says 
 “ he was a person of singular affability, meekness, and humility; of great 
 learning, a frequent preacher, constant resident; of very good wit, fancy, and 
 judgment ; a great divine, and much esteemed by all parties for his preach¬ 
 ing and florid style.” His writings have “been published several times in 
 quarto,” and collected in folio, 1658, “ with the author’s picture.” Wilde, 
 in his “ Iter. Boreale,” published two poems commendatory of Reynolds’s 
 works. Dying, July 28, 1676, he was buried in the chapel attached to his 
 palace, bequeathing several sums and provisions to the poor, and to the 
 inferior clergy of his diocess. See Kennet’s “ Case of Impropriations.” 
 
 Anthony Sparrow, a native of Depden, Suffolk, a scholar and fellow 
 of Queen’s-college, Cambridge, was distinguished, and suffered severely 
 for his royalty. lie appears to have lived in retirement, and almost poverty, 
 for eleven years; but at the Restoration was soon advanced to different 
 preferments in the church. In 1662 he was made master of Queen’s- 
 college in Cambridge, and two years after was appointed vice-chancellor 
 of that university. The king promoted him to the see of Exeter, 1667, 
 where he remained nine years, when he was translated to Norwich. Here, 
 says Blomefield, he obtained the “ praise and commendation of all men, til! 
 May 19, 1685, when he died at his palace, and was interred on the north 
 side of the bishop’s chapel.” Sparrow was author of a “ Rationale upon the 
 Book of Common Prayer,” &c. 1657,—“A Collection of Articles, Injunc¬ 
 tions, Canons, Ordinances,” &c. 4to. 1661,—a Sermon, &c. 
 
 William Lloyd, a native of Wales, was promoted to the see of Llan- 
 daff in 1675, thence to Peterborough in 1679, and to Norwich, June 11, 
 1685; but was deprived of this bishopric in 1690, for refusing to take the 
 oath of allegiance to King William III. Retiring to Hammersmith, near 
 London, he remained there privately for twenty years, but continued to 
 “perform episcopal offices even to the last.” Dying there in January, 1709, 
 he was interred in the belfry of the chapel. 
 
 John Moore, a native of Sutton in Leicestershire, was educated at 
 Catherine-hall, Cambridge; and was nominated Bishop of Norwich by the 
 king in April, 1691. He presided here for sixteen years, when he was 
 
BISHOPS FROM 1707 TO 1743. 
 
 75 
 
 translated to Ely, July 31, 1707. Dr. S. Clarke edited two volumes of 
 his sermons. Blomefield describes him “ as the most noted collector of 
 hooks in all Englandand says his library was sold for six thousand 
 guineas to King George I. who gave it to the university of Cambridge. 
 See Dibdin’s “ Bibliomania.” 
 
 Charles Trimnel, of a respectable Worcestershire family, was conse¬ 
 crated Bishop of Norwich, February 8, 1707; and on his first visit to that 
 city was met and escorted by “ thirty coaches, forty clergymen, and a great 
 number of gentlemen and citizens on horseback.” Presiding here till 1721, 
 he was then translated to Winchester; and was succeeded by 
 
 Thomas Green, who sat here till May, 1723, when going to Ely, 
 
 John Leng was elected his successor by the recommendation of George 
 I. whose chaplain he had been. His dominion was however very short, as 
 he died in London, from the small-pox, in October, 1727, and was interred 
 in the church of St. Margaret, Westminster. Besides several sermons on 
 public occasions, which he published, he was editor of the “ Cambridge 
 Terence,”—“ Tully’s Offices,” in three books, sixth edition, as translated by 
 Sir Roger le Strange, but revised, corrected, See. by our bishop. 
 
 William Baker was born at Ilton in Somersetshire, and educated at 
 Wadham-college, Oxford, of which he was afterward made warden. In 
 1723 he was advanced to the see of Bangor, and translated thence to 
 Norwich in 1727. He published four sermons; and died at Bath, Decem¬ 
 ber, 1732. 
 
 Robert Butts, a native of Hartest in Suffolk, after receiving his educa¬ 
 tion at Trinity-college, Cambridge, was installed Dean of Norwich, April 
 10, 1731, and in the following January was promoted to the see. He pre¬ 
 sided here only six years, when he was translated to Ely; where he was 
 interred in 1748, and where a mural monument is raised to his memory. 
 
 Sir Thomas Gooch, Bart, a descendant of the Gooch family in Suffolk, 
 was elected to this see, November, 1738. Educated at Caius-college, 
 Cambridge, he was made custos, or master of that house, and continued 
 vice-chancellor in the years 1717, 1718, and 1719; during which time he 
 contrived to raise the sum of ten thousand pounds, which has since been 
 
76 
 
 NORWICH CATHEDRAL. 
 
 expended in building the senate-house. Previous to his settlement a,t Nor¬ 
 wich, the common passage to the palace from the close was through the 
 nave and north transept of the cathedral; but this shameful practice was 
 stopped by him, and a new entrance made. He also considerably repaired 
 and beautified the palace, which had been neglected ever since the Resto¬ 
 ration. With truly benevolent feelings he instituted, in 1742, two societies 
 in Norfolk and Suffolk for the relief and support of distressed widows and 
 orphans of poor clergymen. He was translated to Ely, March 11, 1747-8. 
 
 Thomas Hayter, preceptor to his present majesty, and chaplain to 
 Archbishop Blackburne, who bequeathed him a large fortune, was advanced 
 to Norwich, 1749. After presiding here twelve years, he was promoted to 
 the see of London in 1761, and died February 9, 1762. 
 
 Philip Yonge was translated from Bristol to this see in 1761, on the 
 removal of Hayter, and continued to preside over this diocess for twenty- 
 two years, when he died, April 23, 1783, and was interred in South Audley- 
 street chapel, Westminster. 
 
 Lewis Bagot, born in 1740 , was educated in Christ’s-college, Oxford, 
 and was chosen dean of that cathedral, January 25, 1776. In 1782 he was 
 promoted to the see of Bristol, and translated thence to Norwich in the 
 following year, and seven years afterwards again translated to St. Asaph. 
 At the latter place he rebuilt the palace, and adapted its form and arrange¬ 
 ment to the natural situation and character of the place. Besides some 
 published sermons, he was author of “A Defence of the Subscription to 
 the Thirty-nine Articles,”—“ Twelve Discourses on the Prophecies.” 
 See Nichols’s “ Literary Anecdotes,” vol. v. p. 630. 
 
 George Horne, properly characterized as the amiable and exemplary 
 Bishop of Norwich, was a native of Othany, near Maidstone in Kent, where 
 he was born, November 30, 1730. Sent early to University-college, Oxford, 
 he there soon distinguished himself. When about nineteen years of age 
 he engaged warmly and learnedly in a controversy relating to the Hutchin- 
 sonian principles, which at that time was agitated by the Oxonians. 
 Afterwards he was involved in another controversy with Dr. Kenicott, of 
 Exeter-college, respecting a new translation and reform of the text of the 
 
BISHOPS FROM 1789 TO 1805. 
 
 77 
 
 Bible. Mr. Horne decidedly objected to it, as calculated to endanger the 
 interests of Christianity. In an anonymous “ Letter to Dr. Adam Smith," 
 he endeavours to prove that the cheerfulness and tranquillity assumed by 
 David Hume in his last illness were fictitious. In dwelling on and study¬ 
 ing this subject, he was stimulated to undertake something more copious 
 and cogent: and hence, in 1784, he producec his “ Letters on Infidelity .” 
 These excited much attention, and were highly commended by some theo¬ 
 logical critics. In approbation of the character of Mr. Horne, the. college 
 to which he belonged elected him president in 1768. This was a prelude 
 to further and more exalted honours, being next appointed one of the 
 king’s chaplains, promoted to the vice-chancellorship of the university in 
 1776; and in 1781 appointed Dean of Canterbury. His next advancement 
 was to the see of Norwich in 1789; but he lived only about three years 
 afterwards. His infirmities at the time of consecration, rendered him 
 unable to read his “first visitation sermon,” which was prepared, and has 
 since been printed in his “ Works.” Bishop Horne died at Bath, January 
 17, 1792, and his corpse was conveyed to Eitham in Kent. His various 
 writings, distinguished by urbanity, cheerfulness, and piety, are published 
 in six volumes, octavo, 1802, preceded by a full Memoir, by his chaplain 
 and friend, the Rev. William Jones. 
 
 Charles Manners Sutton, born in 1755, after receiving his classical 
 education at Emanuel-college, Cambridge, was first made Dean of Peter¬ 
 borough in 1791, and advanced to the see of Norwich in 1792. Here he 
 discharged his duties with honour to himself and benefit to his diocess for 
 nearly thirteen years, when, on the demise of Archbishop Moore, he was 
 translated to the metropolical see of Canterbury in 1805. 
 
 Henry Bathurst, LL. D. the present amiable and liberal-minded pre¬ 
 late, was promoted to Norwich in 1805. Educated at Winchester and 
 New-college, Oxford, he was successively appointed a canon of Christ¬ 
 church, to the living of Cirencester, and to a prebendal stall in Durham. 
 
@L Chronological Cable of the &ges anb Styles of different ^arts of the Church, anh 
 
 contiguous 23utlhtngs. 
 
 Bishops and Kings. 
 
 Heriiert Losing .. ) 
 William II. Henry I. ] 
 
 Ebora.ru. ^ 
 
 Henry I. Stephen .... $ 
 
 John de Oxford.. . ) 
 Henry II. Richard I. \ 
 
 Sofuei.u . ) 
 
 Henry III. \ 
 
 Skekning. ) 
 
 Edward I. f 
 
 Middleton . ) 
 
 Edward I. ] 
 
 Walpole . j 
 
 Edward I. $ 
 
 Salmon. > 
 
 Edward II.$ 
 
 Henry de Well. 
 
 Walter de Burnet, ) 
 and others. $ 
 
 Percy. ) 
 
 Edward III.) 
 
 Wakeryng. J 
 
 Henry V. \ 
 
 Jeffrey Simons. 
 
 Alnvvyk. ) 
 
 Henry VI. S 
 
 Lyhart.) 
 
 Henry VI. i 
 
 Goldwell.^ 
 
 Rich. III. Hen. VII. $ 
 
 Nix. ) 
 
 Hen. VII. Hen. VIII. * 
 
 Temp. 
 
 1096 
 1122 
 1197 
 1244 
 1275 
 1278 
 1297 
 1320 
 
 1302 
 
 1361 
 
 1416 
 
 ^ 1425 
 £ 1430 
 
 1463 
 
 1480 
 
 1510 
 
 Parts of the Edifice. 
 
 1 East End, Choir, and Ailes. 
 
 f Chapels of Jesus, and St.Luke. Transepts 
 
 Nave and Ailes . 
 
 f Repaired and fitted up the Church, } 
 ( after a fire.$ 
 
 Lady Chapel, at east end (destroyed) . . . . 
 
 St. Ethelbert’s Gate-house. 
 
 ( Repaired and finished Church, and re- ) 
 l dedicated it.j 
 
 \ Blomefield says he built the Tower and ^ 
 l part of Cloister, with Chapter-house $ 
 
 S South Walk, and part of East Cloister. . 
 ( St. John’s Chapel, and Hall in the Palace 
 
 Cloister, North Walk of. 
 
 Cloister; Glazing and Iron to Windows . . 
 
 Built the Spire, and repaired the Tower . . 
 
 £ Cloister, Door-way at North-west An- ) 
 l gle, and part of West Walk.$ 
 
 Remainder of West Walk and Lavatories . 
 
 Erpingham Gate-house. A 
 
 i Central West Window, Door-way, En- J 
 \ trance to Bishop's Palace. j 
 
 C Repaired part of Spire and Church ; A 
 ' Roof of Nave, and Screen in Nave ; > 
 C Gale-house to Bishop's Palace .... 3 
 
 C Stone Roof to the Choir, Arches, and A 
 •? ornamental Niches near the Altar; his J- 
 l Tomb.3 
 
 Stone Roofs of North and South Transepts 
 
 Described. 
 
 19 , 20 , 34 , 35 
 
 44 , 51 . 
 
 20 , 33 , 35 , 51 
 
 20 , 53 . 
 
 20 . 
 
 23 , 42 . 
 
 24 . 
 
 24 . 
 
 24 . 
 
 48 , 58 . 
 
 25 , 38 , 39 . . . 
 
 25 . 
 
 25 , 60 . 
 
 25 . 
 
 25 , 38 . 
 
 25 , 31 , 32 . . . 
 
 25 , 35 , 39 , 40 
 
 26 , 36 . 
 
 26 , 37 . 
 
 Plates. 
 
 I. VIII. IX. X. XL 
 XIII. XIV. XIX. 
 
 I. V. XII. 
 
 XXIV. 
 
 I. XXII. 
 XX. XXII. 
 
 XXIII. 
 
 II. III. XXII. 
 
 XII. XXII. 
 
 XV. XVI. XVII. 
 XVIII. 
 
& <£IjronoIoQtcaI Utet of tfje of jlorftHclf), 
 
 WITH 
 
 CONTEMPORARY KINGS AND POPES. 
 
 No. 
 
 BISHOPS. 
 
 Consecrated or Translated 
 
 Died or Translated 
 
 Buried at 
 
 Kings of 
 
 Popes. 
 
 
 OF EAST ANGLIA, OR 
 
 From . 
 
 To . 
 
 
 East Anglia. 
 
 Sigebert. 
 
 
 1 
 
 DUNWICH. 
 
 Felix. 
 
 
 
 (' Dunwich.A 
 
 ' Soliam, Camb. . * 
 
 * Ramsey, Hunt., j 
 
 Honorius I. 
 
 2 
 
 Thomas. 
 
 
 
 Egric. Anna. 
 
 Theodoras. 
 
 3 
 
 Boniface. 
 
 
 
 
 /Ethelhere. 
 
 St Martin I. 
 
 4 
 
 Bisus: Bosa. 
 
 
 
 
 Ethelvvald . 
 
 Vitalian. 
 
 
 SEE DIVIDED. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Dunwich. North Elmliam. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 Etta. l Bedwinus .... 
 
 673 . 
 
 
 
 $ Adulf. Elswulf. ) 
 
 Adeodatus. 
 
 
 2 Astwolph. 2 Northbert.... 
 
 679 . 
 
 
 
 ( Beorn . ) 
 
 S. Agatho. 
 
 
 3 Eadferth, 731 3 Headnlac. 
 
 731 .. 
 
 
 
 Ethclred. 
 
 Gregory III. 
 Gregory III. 
 
 Paul I. 
 
 
 
 736 
 
 
 
 
 
 5 Alberth. 5 Lanferth. 
 
 766 . 
 
 
 
 Ethelbyrhte. 
 
 
 6 Etflaf. 6 Athclwolf .... 
 
 811 . 
 
 
 
 
 Leo III. 
 
 
 7 Heardrcd. 7 Unfertli .... 
 
 
 
 
 
 Leo III. 
 
 
 8 Alsin . 8 Siblia. 
 
 816 . 
 
 
 
 
 Stephen V. 
 
 Eugenius II. 
 Eugenius II. 
 
 
 9 Tidferth. 9 Hmifert. 
 
 824 .. 
 
 
 
 
 
 10 Weremund ... 10 Humbert, St. 
 
 
 870-1 
 
 
 Offa. 
 
 
 11 Wybred. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 SEES UNITED. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Elmham. 
 
 
 
 
 England. 
 
 
 i 
 
 Tlieodred I. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 Theodred !I. 
 
 
 063 
 
 
 Edgar . 
 
 John XII. 
 
 3 
 
 Alhulf . 
 
 
 
 
 
 John XII. 
 
 4 
 
 Ailfric I. 
 
 
 
 
 
 John XIII. 
 
 5 
 
 Edelstane.. 
 
 
 
 Elv 
 
 Ethelred. 
 
 Benedict VII. 
 
 6 
 
 Algar, St. 
 
 
 
 . 
 
 Elv 
 
 Edmund Ironside ... 
 
 Benedict VIII. 
 
 7 
 
 Alwin . 
 
 
 
 Elv . 
 
 Canute. 
 
 Benedict VIII. 
 
 8 
 
 Ailfric II. 
 
 
 1038 
 
 . 
 
 
 John XIX. 
 
 9 
 
 Ailfric III. 
 
 
 
 
 
 Benedict IX. 
 
 10 
 
 Stigand . 
 
 
 i .Deprived, 1040 A 
 
 
 
 Benedict IX. 
 
 11 
 
 Grimketcl. 
 
 
 C_Winchester, 1017 j 
 
 
 
 Benedict IX. 
 
 12 
 
 Egelmare . 
 
 
 
 
 
 Damasus VI. 
 
 
 OF THETFORD. 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 Herfast . 
 
 
 
 
 William I. 
 
 Alexander IT. 
 
 2 
 
 William Galsagus.. 
 
 
 
 
 William I. and II.... 
 
 Victor III. 
 
 L 
 
80 
 
 CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF BISHOPS, ETC. 
 
 BISHOPS. 
 
 OF NORWICH. 
 Herbert Lozinga. 
 
 Eborard, or Everard .. 
 
 William Turbus, or Turberville 
 
 JO 
 
 j a 
 
 J 5 
 
 14 
 
 15 
 
 J 6 
 
 17 
 
 18 
 
 19 
 
 20 
 21 
 
 22 
 
 John de Oxford . 
 
 John dc Grey . 
 
 Pandulf, Pope’s Legate . 
 
 Thomas de Blumville .. 
 
 Ralph. 
 
 Simon de Elmliam, elected, set aside 
 
 William de Raleigh . 
 
 'Valter de Suffield 
 Simon de Waltone 
 
 Roger de Skeining . 
 
 William de Middleton. 
 
 Ralph de Walpole, or de Ely . 
 
 John Salmon . 
 
 Robert de Baldoek .... 
 
 William de Ayreminne 
 Thomas de Hemenhale 
 
 Anthony de Beck . 
 
 William Bateman . 
 
 Thomas Percy . 
 
 Consecrated or Translated 
 
 From . 
 
 5 . Thetford, 1091 } 
 
 t Apr.9.Norwich, 1094 $ 
 
 June 12, 1121 
 
 lilt 
 
 Dec. 14, 117* 
 
 ..Sept. 24, 1200 
 ..May 29, 1222 
 , Dec. 20 , 1226 
 . Oct. 28, 1236 
 
 .... Sept. 2.5, 1239 
 
 ... Feb. 20 , 1244-5 
 March 10 , 1257-8 
 
 Sept. 1 9, 1266 
 
 Henry de Spencer. 
 
 Alexander dc Toltington. 
 
 Richard Courtenay 
 John de Wakeryng. 
 William Alnwyk .... 
 Thomas Browne .... 
 
 John Stanbery . 
 
 Walter Lyhart . 
 
 James Goldwell. 
 
 Thomas Jan, or Jane . 
 Richard Nvx . 
 
 William Rttgg ... 
 Thomas Thirlby 
 
 .May 29, 1278 
 
 March 20 , 1283-9 
 ..... Nov. 15, 1299 
 . Aug. 11 , 1325 
 
 . Sept. 13, 1325 
 
 .. Elected, April 5, 1337 
 
 . April 8,1337 
 
 . Jan. 23,134.3-4 
 
 . April 14, 1355 
 
 April 20 , 1370 
 ..Oct. 23, 1407 
 
 . Sept. 27, 1415 
 
 . May 31, 1416 
 
 . Aug. 18, 1426 
 
 Rochester, Sept. 19, 1436 
 
 $ .. Elected 1445 ) 
 
 l Set aside by the Pope j 
 
 Feb. 27, 1445-6 
 
 .. Oct. 4, 1472 
 . Oct. 17, 1499 
 April 17, 15CU 
 
 ... Elected, May 31, 1536 
 
 $ Westminxt. Ap. 1 . 1550 
 ( Installed, April 20 . ... 
 
 Died or Translated 
 
 To 
 
 July 22 , 1119 
 
 '» .Deprived, 1145 ) 
 
 ) . Died, Oct. 1149 \ 
 
 Jan. 17, 1173-4 
 
 . June 2 , 1200 
 
 Oct. 18, 1214 
 Aug. 16, 1226 
 Aug. 16, 1236 
 .. 123? 
 
 Buried at 
 
 Kings of England. 
 
 Popes. 
 
 ( ... Winchester, 1243 ) 
 l Died, July 20 , 1250 $ 
 
 . May 20, 1257 
 
 . Jan. 2 , 1265-6 
 
 Jan. 22 , 1277-8 
 .. Aug. 31, 1288 
 
 ( .. Ely, July 15, 1299 ) 
 
 ( Died, March 22,1301 5 
 
 .July 6, 1325 
 
 $ Resigned,Sep.3,1325 ) 
 
 i ... Died, 1327 S 
 
 .March 27, 1336 
 
 . W orcester, 1337 
 
 . Dec. 19, 1345 
 
 .Jan. 6 , 1554-5 
 
 .Aug* 8 , 1369 
 
 Aug. 23, 140i 
 
 • April 28, 1415 
 
 .Sept. 15, 1115 
 
 .April 9, 1425 
 
 .Lincoln, Sept. 19, 1430 
 . Dec. 6 , 144.) 
 
 . May 11 , 1474 
 
 . May 24, 147 a 
 
 Feb 15, 1498-9 
 
 . Sept. 1500 
 
 Jan. 14, 1535-6 
 
 \ Resig.Jan.31,1549-50 ( 
 ^ Died, Sept. 21 , 1550 1 
 
 .Ely, Sept. 15, 15 )4 \ 
 
 ...Died, Aug. 26, 1570 \ 
 
 Norwich. 
 
 Will. II. Henry I. 
 
 Norwich. 
 
 Henry I. Stephen 
 
 Norwich . 
 
 Stephen. Hen. II. 
 
 
 A Henry II. } 
 
 
 ( Rich. I. John i 
 
 Norwich. 
 
 John 
 
 Norn ich ... 
 
 Henry III. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Norwich . 
 
 Henry III. 
 
 Norwich. 
 
 Henry III. 
 
 Norwich . 
 
 Henry III. Edw.I. 
 
 Norwich . 
 
 Edward I. 
 
 Ely . 
 
 Edward I. 
 
 Norwich . 
 
 Edward I. and II. 
 
 St. Paul, London ... 
 
 Edward II. 
 
 Norwich . . 
 
 Edw. II. and III. 
 
 
 Edward III. 
 
 Norwich . 
 
 Edward III. ... 
 
 Avignon . 
 
 Edward HI. 
 
 Norwich ... 
 
 Edward III. 
 
 
 ( Edward III. ... 
 
 Norwich . 
 
 ? Richard 11. 
 
 
 (_ Henry IA r . 
 
 Norwich. 
 
 Henry IA r . and A T . 
 
 Westminster . 
 
 Henry V. 
 
 Norwich . 
 
 Henry A*, and Vi. 
 
 Lincoln . 
 
 Henry VI. 
 
 Norwich .. 
 
 Henry AH. 
 
 
 
 Norwich . 
 
 Hen. VI. Edw . IV. 
 
 
 ( Edw. IV.and A*. 
 
 Norwich . 
 
 ’ Richard III. ... 
 
 
 ( Henry VII. 
 
 Norwich . 
 
 Henry VII. 
 
 
 $ Henry VIT .... ( 
 
 Norwich .. 
 
 l Henry AHii. ] 
 
 Norwich . 
 
 Hen.VIH. Ed.VI. 
 
 Lambeth . 
 
 Edw r ard. VI. 
 
 A Urban II. Pascal II, 
 e Gelas II. Calix II. 
 i Calix II. Honor. II. 
 ’ Inno. III. Celcst. II. 
 C Lucius II. 
 
 < Eugeuius III. 
 
 J Anast. IV. 
 t Adrian IV. Alcx.III. 
 0 Alex.III.Lucius III, 
 ) Urb.III. Greg.VIII. 
 i Clement III. 
 
 (, Celcst.III. Inno.III. 
 Innocent III. 
 
 Honorius III. 
 
 Hon. III. GregoryIX. 
 Gregory IX. 
 
 t Innocent IV. 
 InnocentIV. Alex. IV 
 Urban IV. ClementIV 
 ^ Clem. IA*. Greg. X 
 
 * 
 
 Adrian V. John XXL 
 Nicholas III. 
 
 Nidi.III. Martin IV. 
 £ Hon. LV. Nich. IV. 
 S Nich. IV. Celest. V. 
 i Boniface VIII. 
 
 $ Bon.AHII. Bene. XI. 
 '( Clem.A'. John XXII. 
 
 John XXII. 
 
 John XXII. Bene.XII. 
 Benedict XII. 
 
 Bene. XII. Clem. AH. 
 Clem. AH. Innocent VI. 
 Innocent AH. Urban V. 
 C Urban A T . Greg. XI. 
 ’ Urban VI. Bon. IX. 
 ( Innocent VII. 
 f Innocent VII. 
 
 I Greg. XII. Alex. V. 
 t John XXIII. 
 
 John XXIH. 
 
 John XXIII. Mart. V. 
 Mart. V. Eugen. LV. 
 Eugenios IV. 
 
 f Eugenius IV. Nic.V. 
 ' Calix III. Pius II. 
 
 I Paul II. Sextus IV. 
 
 S Sex.IV. Inno. VIII. 
 £ Alexander AH. 
 
 Alexander VI. 
 
 { Pius III. Julius II. 
 
 [ Leo X. Adrian AH. 
 I Clem. VII. Paullll. 
 
No. 
 
 35 
 
 36 
 
 37 
 
 38 
 
 39 
 
 40 
 
 41 
 
 42 
 
 43 
 
 44 
 
 45 
 
 46 
 
 4? 
 
 48 
 
 49 
 
 50 
 
 51 
 
 52 
 
 53 
 
 54 
 
 55 
 
 56 
 
 57 
 
 58 
 
 59 
 
 60 
 
 61 
 
 6 a 
 
 63 
 
 64 
 
 65 
 
 CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF BISHOPS, ETC 
 
 81 
 
 BISHOPS. 
 
 John Hopton. 
 
 Richard Cox . 
 
 John Parkhurst_ 
 
 Edmund Freke .... 
 
 Edmund Scambler 
 William Redman . 
 
 John Jeggon . 
 
 John Overall . 
 
 Samuel Harsuet.... 
 
 Francis White. 
 
 Richard Corhett .. 
 Matthew Wren .... 
 Richard Montague 
 
 Joseph Hall. 
 
 Edward Reynolds . 
 Anthony Sparrow . 
 
 William Lloyd . 
 
 John Moore. 
 
 Charles Trimnel.... 
 Thomas Green . 
 
 John Leng. 
 
 William Baker. 
 
 Robert Butts . 
 
 Sir Thomas Gooch 
 Samuel Lisle ........ 
 
 Thomas Hayter .... 
 
 Philip Yonge. 
 
 Consecrated or Translated 
 
 From. 
 
 . Oct. 25, 1554 
 
 .. Elected, June 29, 1559 
 .Sept, l, 1560 
 
 Rochester, July 13, 1575 
 
 Peterboro’, Dec. 15,1584 
 
 .Jan. 12, 1594-5 
 
 .Feb. 20, 1602-3 
 
 Lich. Cov. May 21, 1618 
 Chichester, Aug. 8, 1619 
 
 Carlisle, Jan. 22, 1628-9 
 
 ... Oxford, April 7, 1632 
 Hereford, Nov. 10, 1655 
 Chichester, May 4, 1638 
 ... Exeter, Nov. 15, 1641 
 
 . Jan. 6, 1660-1 
 
 ... Exeter, Aug. 28, 1676 
 
 Peterboro’, June 11,1685 
 
 .July 5, 1691 
 
 . Feb. 8, 1707-8 
 
 . Oct. 8, 1721 
 
 . Nov. 3, 1723 
 
 Bangor, March 5, 1727-8 
 .Feb. 25, 1732-3 
 
 .... Bristol, Nov. 9, 1738 
 
 . St. Asaph, 1748 
 
 . 1749 
 
 . Bristol, 1761 
 
 Died or Translated 
 
 To. 
 
 .... . 1559 
 
 . Ely, 1559 
 
 . Feb. 2, 1574-5 
 
 ( Worcester,Dec. 1584 ) 
 l Died, March 20,1590 ] 
 
 . May 7, 1594 
 
 . Sept. 25, 1602 
 
 . March 13, 1617-8 
 
 . May 12, 1619 
 
 ... \ 7 ork, Nov. 6, 1628 
 <, ... Ely, Dec. 8, 1631 } 
 
 ( . Died, Feb. 1637 $ 
 
 ... .July 28, 1635 
 
 ... Ely, April 24, 1638 
 
 . April 13, 1641 
 
 .Sept. 8, 1656 
 
 . July, 28 1676 
 
 . May 19, 1685 
 
 $ Depriv.Feb.t,1690-1 ) 
 l Died, Jan. 1,1709-10 5 
 \ .. Ely, July, 31, 1707 ') 
 ( Died, July 31, 1714 } 
 Winchester, Aug.19,1721 
 $ ...Ely, Sept. 4, 1723 } 
 
 ( .... Died, May 1738 \ 
 
 . Oct. 26, 1727 
 
 . Dee. 4, 1732 
 
 . Ely, May 24, 1738 
 
 f . Ely, 1743 ) 
 
 l .Died, 17.54 $ 
 
 . Oct. 3, 1749 
 
 <j .London, 1761 ) 
 
 ( . Died, 1762 \ 
 
 . 1783 
 
 Buried at 
 
 Norwich 
 
 Norwich . 
 
 Worcester . 
 
 Norwich. 
 
 Norwich . 
 
 Aylesham . 
 
 Norwich . 
 
 Chigwell, Essex 
 
 Norwich. 
 
 Cambridge. 
 
 Norwich.. 
 
 Heigham. 
 
 Norwich. 
 
 Norwich . 
 
 Hammersmith 
 
 Ely . 
 
 Winchester . 
 
 Ely . 
 
 Westminster .... 
 Bath Abbey Ch. 
 Ely ... 
 
 Northolt, Middlesex 
 
 Fulham . 
 
 Westminster . 
 
 Kings of England. 
 
 Mary 
 
 Elizabeth 
 
 Elizabeth 
 
 Elizabeth 
 
 Elizabeth 
 Elizabeth 
 James I. 
 
 James I. 
 
 James I. Charles I. 
 Charles I. 
 
 Charles I. 
 
 Charles I. 
 
 Charles I. 
 
 Charles I. 
 
 Charles II. 
 
 Charles II. 
 
 James II. 
 
 ( Will, and Mary. 
 I Anne 
 
 Anne. George I. 
 George I. 
 
 George I. 
 
 George II. 
 
 George II. 
 
 George II. 
 
 George 11. 
 
 George II. 
 
 George III. 
 
 Lewis Bagot 
 
 Bristol, 1783 
 
 George Horne . J 
 
 Charles Manners Sutton . 
 
 Henry Bathurst ... 
 
 une 7, 1790 
 
 . 1792 
 
 .... 1805 
 
 t . St. Asaph, 1790 ) 
 
 l . Died, 1802 $ 
 
 .Jau. 17, 1792 
 
 . Canterbury, 1805 
 
 Eltham, Kent 
 
 George III. 
 
 George III. 
 George III. 
 George III. 
 
a CTijninofoBtcal Hint of tfje priors atrtr Seans: of Jlocfiottf). 
 
 PJUORS. 
 
 Appointed. 
 
 Died or Removed. 
 
 No. 
 
 PRIORS. 
 
 Appointed. 
 
 Died or Removed. 
 
 
 .. ... 1101 
 
 
 18 
 
 Henrv tie Lakenham. 
 
 
 .. .1 
 
 
 
 
 19 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 .Oct. 90 1 14.0 
 
 20 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 . M-.iv Ifi, 1158 
 
 21 
 
 Simon Bozsun. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 22 
 
 Laurence de Leek. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 23 
 
 Nicholas de Hoo. 
 
 
 . . 1 *38? 
 
 
 
 
 24 
 
 25 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 . Dec. 1/7 1901 
 
 
 .... Dee. 20, 1407 
 
 .Sept 1 J .97 
 
 
 
 
 26 
 
 
 .Oct. 8 , 14.97 
 
 
 
 
 Fph 14. 1910 
 
 27 
 
 
 . . . Ort, 1 9 14^6 
 
 
 
 
 
 28 
 
 
 
 . 1471 
 
 
 
 
 29 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 oO 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 . Nov] ] 266 
 
 31 
 
 
 
 
 
 . .. April 18, 1265 
 
 
 32 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 . Sept. 9.ftj 1 979, 
 
 33 
 
 
 
 
 
 . Oct. 1, 1722 
 
 . March 9, 1288 
 
 34 
 
 
 . 15^Q 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 DISSOLUTION OF PRIORY. ESTABLISHMENT OF DEANERY. 
 
 DEANS. 
 
 Appointed. 
 
 Died or Removed. 
 
 No. 
 
 DEANS. 
 
 Appointed. 
 
 Died or Removed. 
 
 William Castleton . 
 
 .May 2, 1538 
 
 
 13 
 
 John Crofts. 
 
 . . . . Aug. 7, 1660 
 
 
 
 
 . \ .’ 1554 
 
 Id 
 
 
 .... Sept. 2 ] 1670 
 
 
 John Christopherson. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 John Boxhall. 
 
 
 
 16 
 
 Henry Fairfax. 
 
 
 
 John Harpsfield. 
 
 
 
 17 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 _Sept. 1573 
 
 18 
 
 
 
 
 
 .... Nov. 28,1573 
 
 ...* . 1.^89 
 
 19 
 
 
 . .. April 10, 1731 
 
 
 Thomas Dove. 
 
 
 
 20 
 
 John Baron. 
 
 .‘.1733 
 
 
 John Jegffon. 
 
 
 
 21 
 
 
 .1739 
 
 . 1751 
 
 ) George Montgomery. 
 
 .June 6, 1603 
 
 
 22 
 
 Edward Tovvnsliend. 
 
 
 ..j 765 
 
 
 
 . ... 1628 
 
 23 
 
 Philp Lloyd. 
 
 .1765 
 
 
 i John Hassal .. 
 
 
 .1643 
 
 24 
 
 Jnsrnh Tinner. 
 
 . ... . . . 17QO 
 
 
 
 ' 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
INDEX. 
 
 A. 
 
 Ailfric, bp. called the good, 10. 
 
 Ailfric II. bp. called the black, 12. 
 
 Ailfric III. bp. called the little, 12. 
 
 Algar, bp. 10. 
 
 AIhuIf, bp. 10. 
 
 Alnwvk, bp. built western door-way, 31; gate¬ 
 house to the palace, 03. 
 
 Athelstane, bp. gifts to Ely church, 10. 
 
 Alwyn, bp. favoured Bury, expelled secular 
 clergy, and introduced regulars, 11. 
 
 Arfast, or Herfast, bp. attempted to obtain the 
 abbey of Bury, 13; Herman’s anecdote of, 
 ib.; built a cathedral and palace at Thet- 
 ford, 14. 
 
 Ayreminne, bp. 58. 
 
 B. 
 
 Bagot, bp. 79. 
 
 Baker, bp. 70. 
 
 Baldock, bp. committed to Newgate, and died 
 of grief, 58. 
 
 Bateman, bp. attempts on Bury, 11; fined 
 <£10,000, ib.; account of, 39. 
 
 Bathurst, bp. 78. 
 
 Beck, de, bp. account of; poisoned, 59. 
 
 Browne, bp. 03. 
 
 Bury and Thetford, disputes between, 11. 
 
 Butts, bp. 70. 
 
 C. 
 
 Cathedral church begun, 17—19; continued 
 by Eborard, 20; damaged by fire, ib.; re¬ 
 paired by John de Oxford, ib.; tower, A c. 
 injured bv lightning, ib.; repaired and new 
 consecrated, 24; steeple blown down, 25; 
 cloister and spire built, ib.; described, 27; 
 ground plan, 29; west end, 31, 32; parts of 
 columns, Ac. ib.; nave, 33; west and south 
 sides of tower, ib; interior of the same, 34; 
 
 choir, ib.; transepts, 34, 35; east end, ex¬ 
 terior, 35; nave, ib.; choir, ib.; north aile 
 of choir, 30 ; priors’ door-way, 37; door way 
 in soutli transept, ib.; east and south aile, ib.; 
 cloister, 38; windows of ditto, 40; beauties 
 and defects of church, 42; its chapels, 44; 
 plundered by a mob, 45; fire, 40; repaired, 
 ib.; government of, 47. 
 
 Christianity in East Anglia, 0. 
 
 Chapter-house, 30. 
 
 Chapels in the cathedral, 44. 
 
 Cloister, 25, 31, 37, 38, 40. 
 
 Constantine the Great, birth-place of, 0; his 
 influence in promoting Christianity, ib. 
 
 Corbet, bp. account of, 08; letters of, 09; 
 portrait, 89. 
 
 Courtenay, bp. 02. 
 
 D. 
 
 Dunwicb, Bishops of, see List. 
 
 E. 
 
 East Anglian kingdom, extent of, 7, note. 
 
 Eborard, bp. 51. 
 
 Egelmare, bp. 12. 
 
 Erpingham gate-house, 39, 40; PI. XXIII. 
 
 Ethelbert’s gate-house, 42, Pi. XXIV. 
 
 F. 
 
 Freke, bp. GO. 
 
 Font, fine one, 37. 
 
 G. 
 
 Galsagus, bp. 14. 
 
 Goldwell, bp. 04; built stone roof of choir, 
 chapels, 20; his monument described, 30; 
 view of, PI. XVI.; statue of, PI. XVII. 
 
 Gooch, bp. 77 ; portrait, 89. 
 
 Green, bp. 75. 
 
 Grey, de, bp. 53. 
 
 Grimketel, bp. 12. 
 
 M 
 
84 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 H. 
 
 Hall. bp. bis sufferings, 45; account of, 71. 
 Harsnet, bp. 67. 
 
 Hayter, bp. 78. 
 
 Ho bart. Sir James, 31. 
 
 Hopton, bp. 66. 
 
 Horne, bp. account of, 77; portrait, 89. 
 
 J. 
 
 Jeggon, bp. 67; portrait, 89. 
 
 Jews, disputes with monks, 19. 
 
 L. 
 
 Long, bp. 76. 
 
 Lisle, bp. 78. 
 
 Lloyd, bp. 73; portrait, 88. 
 
 Losing, or Losinga, bp. 15, 16; tomb, 30. 
 Lyhart, bp. built gate to palace, 40; paved the 
 church, roofed the nave, built a screen, 25; 
 account of, 63. 
 
 M. 
 
 Middleton, bp. 57. 
 
 Montague, bp. 70. 
 
 Moore, bp. 74; portrait, 88. 
 
 N. 
 
 Nave, PI. V. 32; PI. XII. description of, 35. 
 Nix, bp. building by, 37 ; account of, 64. 
 Norwich, early state of the city, 18; under 
 interdiction, 22. 
 
 Norman architecture, 27, 29. 
 
 O. 
 
 Oxford, de, bp. privileges obtained, 52. 
 Overal, bp. 67; portrait, 88. 
 
 P. 
 
 Pandulf, bp. and legate, 54. 
 
 Parkhurst, bp. 66. 
 
 Percy, bp. 60. 
 
 R. 
 
 Italcigh, de, bp. 56. 
 
 Relicks, at Norwich, 55, note. 
 
 Reynolds, bp. 72; portrait, 88. 
 
 Rugg, bp. 65. 
 
 S. 
 
 Salmon, bp. built part of cloister, 24; St. John’s 
 chapel, 39; chapel, &c. 48—57. 
 
 Scambler, bp. 66. 
 
 See of East Anglia, 7; Dunwich, 7, 8; North 
 Eltham, 8, 9; Thetford, 13; Norwich, 17. 
 Sigebert, King of East Anglia, founded churches, 
 
 7; heads the army, and is killed, 8. 
 
 Skerning, bp. 22, 57. 
 
 Spire, 34, PI. IX. 
 
 Spencer, bp. 60; suppressed an insurrection, 
 61; impeached in parliament, ib. 
 
 Sparrow, bp. 72 ; portrait, 89. 
 
 Stigand, bp. a politician and priest, 12. 
 
 Statutes of cathedral, 47. 
 
 Suffield, bp. 20. 
 
 Sutton, bp. 77. 
 
 T. 
 
 Transepts, 34, PI. IX.; north, 35, PI. X. 
 Theodored I. bp. 9. 
 
 Theodored II. bp. will of, ib. 
 
 Thetford, bishops of, 13. 
 
 Trimnell, bp. 75; portrait, 89. 
 
 Tottington, bp. 62; imprisoned, ib. 
 
 Tower, described, 33, 34, PI. VI. VII. 
 
 Turbus, bp. 52. 
 
 U. 
 
 Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, contro¬ 
 versy about the origin of, 7, note. 
 
 W. 
 
 Walpole, bp. built tower, or spire, and began 
 the cloister, 24, 57. 
 
 Wakering, bp. 62; built a covered passage, 
 and chapter-house, ib.; entrance from clois¬ 
 ter, 25. 
 
 White, bp. 68 ; portrait, 88. 
 
 Wren, bp. account of, 70; portrait, 88. 
 
 Y. 
 
 Yonge, bp. 79. 
 
A 
 
 %\$t of antr 
 
 THAT HAVE EEEN PUBLISHED RELATING TO 
 
 NORWICH CATHEDRAL; 
 
 ALSO A LIST OF 
 
 ENGRAVED PORTRAITS OF ITS BISHOPS. 
 
 THIS LIST IS SUBJOINED TO GRATIFY THE BIBLIOGRAPHER, THE CRITICAL ANTIQUARY, AND THE ILLUSTRATOR; AS 
 WELL AS TO SHOW, AT ONE VIEW, THE SOURCES WHENCE THE PRECEDING INFORMATION HAS BEEN DERIVED. 
 
 The Cathedral of Norwich, though certainly a curious specimen of ancient ecclesiastical archi¬ 
 tecture, has never attracted the attention of any distinct historian, nor has it been carefully 
 investigated by any distinguished antiquary. 
 
 I. Bartholeinew Cotton, a monk of the Priory of Norwich, about the end of the thirteenth 
 century compiled a treatise in three hooks, on the History of England, chiefly from William of 
 Malmsbury. From this Wharton collected the materials he published in Vol. I. of '‘Anglia Sacra." 
 viz. Annals of the Cathedral of Norwich, from (lie year 1042 to 1*295.—History of the Bishops 
 to 1299.—And thence continued by another hand to 1446. Accounts of the succeeding Bishops, 
 to the Reformation, are also given, as well as a list of the Priors. At the end of the volume, 
 the editor gives some additions and corrections. Tanner says that a copy of Cotton’s work is 
 preserved in the Cathedral Library, with more facts and matter than Wharton published. 
 
 II. “Tree Newes from Norwich: Being a certaine Relation how that the Cathedrall Blades 
 of Norwich (on the 22 of February 1641, being Shrove-tuesday, did put themselves into a 
 posture of defence, because that the Apprentises of Norwich as they imagined) would have 
 pulled downe their organs. In which Relation tlie foolishnesse of these Cathedrall men are to 
 be understood, and deserve to be laughed at for this their silly enterprise; there being no such 
 cause to move them thereunto. Written by T. L.— London, printed for Benjamin Allen and I. B. 
 1641.”—Small 4to. pp. 8.—Tiiis trifling tract, by an illiterate and intemperate person, is only 
 curious as recording a particular event relating to the cathedral. 
 
 III. “ Repertorium ; or some Account of the Tombs and Monuments in the Cathedral Church 
 at Norwich. Begun by Sir Thomas Browne, and continued from the Year 1680 to this present 
 time.” London, 1712; 8vo. This essay, of seventy-four pages and seventeen plates, was 
 published with other miscellaneous posthumous works of the author: in the same collection is also 
 a Latin discourse on “ I lie Antiquities of the Chapel of St. John the Evangelist, now the King’s 
 School, at Norwich; by John Burton.” The volume is very trivial in materials, and the prints or 
 cuts very inaccurate and tasteless. They were executed “mostly at the expense of the nobility 
 and gentry of the county,” as acknowledged by the editor. 
 
 IV. “The Records of Norwich, containing the Monuments in the Cathedral, the Bishops, 
 the Plagues, Fires,” &c. 8vo. Norwich, 1736 8; in two parts. Gough says it was charged 
 “ three half pence.” 
 
 V. “An Account and Description of the Cathedral Church of the Holy Trinity, Norwich, 
 
 and its Precincts. By P. Browne.” 2d edition. Norwich, 1807. 12mo. pp. 57. The first 
 
 edition of this code meeum was printed twenty-one years before the present, which is intended 
 as a guide to the church and its monuments. 
 
 VI. Prynnes “Recorder” contains the decision of King Edward 1. between the Bishop, 
 Prior, and Citizens of Norwich, respecting the damage done to the monastery and church by 
 the latter. 
 
 VII. In Dugdales “ Monasticon Anglicanum,” fol. 1682, are several chartulary papers relating 
 
8G 
 
 NORWICH CATHEDRAL:-LIST OF BOOKS, ESSAYS, &C. 
 
 to the foundation and confirmation of grants to Norwich Cathedral. In vol. i, 409, is a charter 
 from Bishop Herbert, with a bull from Pope Paschal; also a charter of William Rufus: an 
 extract from a MS. in the Bodleian Library, concerning its foundation. In vol. iii. p. 5, is a copy 
 of a patent by John Pesham, Archbishop of Canterbury, A.D. 1281, reciting and confirming the 
 former charters. 
 
 VIII. “The History of the City and County of Norwich,” 8vo. 1708, contains views of the 
 Erpingham gate, cathedral, a north-east view of the city, by Kirkpatrick, Arc. 
 
 IX. In vol. i. of Willis’s “ History of the Mitred Parliamentary Ahbies,” 8vo. 1718, is an 
 account of the foundation of this church, a list of its episcopal and priorial officers, and slight 
 remarks on the state of the cathedral at that preriod: the addenda to vol. i. contains the 
 measurement of the building from William of Worcester; and vol. ii. the dimensions and accounts 
 of various convents and monasteries attached to the church of Norwich. 
 
 X. Ilymer’s “ Feeder a.” folio, 1727-35, vol. iv. p. 732, is a bull for the appointment of Bishop 
 Ant. de Beck to the see, A.D. 1337.—In vol. vii. p. 869, a proclamation that no one shall 
 approach with arms, at the enthronisation of the bishop; also references to the question between 
 the Bishop of Norwich and the men of the city of Lynn. 
 
 XI. The “ Concilia Magnce Britannice” of Wilkins, folio, 1737, contains many patents and 
 charters relating to Norwich Cathedral.—In vol. i. is the confirmation of the foundation, by 
 Herbert himself, and various synodal papers, with the constitutions and statutes of different 
 bishops.—Vol. ii. has accounts of a synod held at Eyam, A. D. 1273,—of a grant for con¬ 
 voking a chapter, of an information and attachment of the Bishop of Norwich,—two letters 
 from Edward II. requiring a subsidy from the prior and convent to resist Robert Bruce, and the 
 answer which was returned bv the convent to the first,—also a letter from the Archbishop of 
 York to the Archbishop of Canterbury, concerning the citation of a court for considering of 
 the jurisdiction of the see of Norwich, while vacant.—In vol. iii. are various commissions and 
 letters from the Archbishop of Canterbury, to receive the dues of the vacant see of Norwich; 
 against prayer being made for heretics; and the letters patent of Bishop Spencer on the conver¬ 
 sion of one.—Vol. iv. has a letter from the Archbishop of Canterbury to the Dean and Chapter 
 of Norwich, respecting petty canons, with the answer to the same, and Bishop Wren’s orders for 
 the service of the church. 
 
 XII. Weever’s “ Anticnt Funeral Monuments of Great Britain,” &c. 4to. 1707, contains 
 extracts from early charters relating to the foundation of Norwich Cathedral, and the life of 
 Bishop Herbert; these are followed by short accounts of the succeeding bishops, from Godwin, 
 the Cottonian MSS. Ac. and a description of the monuments, with transcripts of the epitaphs 
 contained in the church. 
 
 XIII. Leland, in his “ Antiquarii Collectanea,” 8vo. 1774, vol. i. notices many circumstances 
 connected w ith the history of the cathedral, and some particulars respecting the priory, together 
 with the churches given for its establishment.—In vol. iii. is a catalogue of MSS. formerly in the 
 library of the priory. 
 
 XIV. Carter’s “Ancient Sculpture and Painting,” folio, 1786, contains accounts and plates 
 of statues and sculpture on the Erpingham gate, the west front of the monastery gate, the statue 
 of Bishop Lozinga, and the view of a lavatory in the cloister of Norwich Cathedral. 
 
 XV. Nasmith’s edition of Tanner’s “ Aotitia Monastica,” folio, 1787, contains a short 
 account of the original ecclesiastic institution and episcopal foundation at Norwich, with an 
 analytical index to numerous works relating to the subject, in print and MS. Mr. Nasmith also 
 edited the Itineraria of William of Worcester, 8vo. 1778; in which was. some'curious matter 
 relating to the dependant churches, and dimensions of the cloister of Norwich Cathedral. 
 
 XVI. “Sepulchral Monuments in Great Britain,” by R. Gough, folio, 1796. In this work 
 are descriptions of the monuments of Bishops Herbert, Browne, and Goldwell, that of Thomas 
 Bezoun, Prior, Robert Brasyer, and Sir Thomas Erpingham. 
 
 XVIL Vol. xii. of “ Archaologia,” contains specimens of capitals and arches, Ac. from the 
 cathedral, with an essay by W. Wilkins.—Vol. xv. notices concerning the dormitory of the 
 monastery, by Frank Sayers, M.D.; with further observations on the same, by the Rev. W. Gib¬ 
 son. The same building is described with three plates, by J. A. Repton, architect. 
 
 XVIII. In Blomeiield’s “ History of the County of Norfolk,” royal 8vo. 1806, two vols. of 
 
NORWICH CATHEDRAL:—LIST OF BOOKS, ESSAYS, &C. 
 
 87 
 
 which are devoted to Norwich, nearly all the foregoing information is consolidated.—In vol. iii. 
 or vol. i. of Norwich, is contained the first establishment of the bishopric of Dunwich, with 
 short accounts of the four bishops. Following this, are notices of the various removals of the 
 see, and of the successive bishops, priors, archdeacons, and other ecclesiastical officers.—Vol. 
 iv. or vol. ii. is chiefly occupied with the historical details of the cathedral, its foundation, 
 description of monuments and chapels, cloisters and bishop’s palace; ecclesiastical notices 
 concerning the revenues, privileges, statutes, constitution, and preferments. 
 
 XIX. The “ Antiquities of the Anglo-Saxon Church,” by the Rev. John Lingard, 8vo. 1810; 
 contains various notices relating to King Sigebert, Felix, the first bishop of this see, and the 
 institution of the church of the East-anglians. 
 
 ACCOUNTS OF BISHOPS. 
 
 In 1601, Francis Godwin, afterwards Bishop of Landaff, first published his “ Catalogue of 
 the Bishops of England,” with short remarks on their characters. In 1015, it was reprinted 
 with many additions, both of introductory matter, and such as related to the prelates. Henry 
 Wharton, in his “ Anglia Sacra.” and Bishop Nicholson, in his “English Historical Library,” 
 accuse Godwin of having committed many chronological errors and mistakes, and say he 
 frequently confounded his subject. In 1616, the work appeared in a different form, translated 
 into Latin with corrections. The same work, again amended, enlarged, and greatly improved, 
 was published in one volume, folio, with the title of “ De Prcesulibus Ang/iee Commenturius,” 
 under the care of William Richardson, canon of the church of Lincoln. At the conclusion of 
 Isaacson’s “ Saturni Ephemeridcs sice Tabula Historico-chronologica,” is a table containing a chro¬ 
 nological list of “all the archbishops and bishops, with at abridgment of their acts,” Ac. fol. 
 1633. 
 
 A memoir of Bishop Henry le Spencer, by Capgrave, is printed in the second volume of 
 Wharton’s “ Anglia Sacra.” 
 
 In the Harleian MSS. No. 258, is a short account of the death of Bishop Herbert; in 
 Nichols’s “ Liierary Anecdotes of the Eighteenth Century,” 8vo. 1812, are various remarks 
 and notices relative to Bishop Horne, whose life was published by the Rev. William Jones, 
 about 1799; and in letters from the Bodleian Library, 8vo. 1813, is a singular extract con¬ 
 cerning Bishop Corbett. 
 
 A critical memoir of the latter prelate, with his poems, was edited and published by Octavius 
 Gilchrist, Esq. in one vol. 8vo. being the fourth edition, “with considerable additions,” 1807. 
 This is a very interesting volume. 
 
 In Nichols’s “History, Ac. of Leicestershire,” vol. ii. are memoirs of Bishop JHoore and 
 Bishop Hall. 
 
 Bishop Nicholson, in Hist. Lib. refers to a MS. account of the bishops and deans of Norwich, 
 by Thomas Searle, A. D. 1659, as being in the possession of the bishop at the time of his 
 writing. 
 
 PRINTS. 
 
 In Browne’s “ Repertorium,” a sort of Bird's-eye View of the South Side of the Cathedral, 
 with the Cloister, by Hulsbergh: —also the West Front of the Church, by the same:—a View of 
 Bishop Goldwell’s Monument, and some other tombs: — Arms and Figures, from a painted 
 window:—and a View' of the Erpingham Gate. 
 
 D. King engraved South and West Views of the Cathedral:—and Vertue mentions a Plan of 
 it by Hollar. 
 
 Blomefield drew, and Toms engraved “An Icnography of Norwich Cathedral,” at the 
 expense of the Society of Antiquaries. 
 
 A North-East View of the Cathedral was engraved by Harris, in 1742. 
 
 A View of the South Side from the Dean’s Garden was engraved by V. Green and Jukes, in 
 
 1779. 
 
 In Carter’s “ Ancient Architecture,” fol. are etchings of an old Statue in a Niche on the outside 
 
88 
 
 NORWICH CATHEDRAL:—LIST OF PORTRAITS, &C. 
 
 of (lie North Transept:—West View of the Upper Close-gateway :—also View of the Lavatory 
 iu the Cloister.—In the same artist’s work, entitled “ Ancient Sculpture and Painting, ” is a 
 View of the Door-way from N. E. Angle of the Cloisters to the Church.-—In the same are 
 etchings of Statues and basso relievo from the Erpingham Gate, St. Ethelbert’s Gate, and-the 
 West Front of the Cathedral, with Descriptions of the same, by Francis Douce, Esq. 
 
 North-West View of the Cathedral, engraved in aquatinta, by F. C. and G. Lewis, from 
 a drawing, by Buckler, was published in 1807. 
 
 The third volume of “ the Architectural Antiquities of Great Britain,” contains a Plan, View, 
 and a Series of Windows of the Cloister, with Description of the same, by J. A. Repton, Esq. 
 West Front of the Cathedral, drawn and engraved in aquatinta, by J. Sanders, 1787. 
 
 View of the Choir, &c. looking East, by the same. 
 
 ENGRAVED PORTRAITS OF THE BISHOPS OF NORWICH. 
 
 1. William Bateman: “ Episc. Norwic. Anise S. S. et individuae Trinitatis Fund. Anno Donl. 
 1350 — mez. Faber, f. 1. 4to. — In the Series of the Cambridge Founders — to Ackerman’s 
 “ History of the University of Cambridge,” large 4to. 1815. Granger. Bromley. 
 
 2. John Jeggon: “C.C.C.C. Custus, Epis. Norv. ast. 50, 1661,” etched by Tyson. He is 
 represented in his Doctor’s robes.—4to.—published by Richardson, Jan. 1, 1800. 
 
 3. John Overall: Hollar, f. 1657—small oval in Sparrow’s “Rationale of the Common 
 
 Prayer,” R. White, sc. 4to. 1690. — Prefixed to his “ Convocation Book,” by Sancroft. 
 Granger. Bromley. 
 
 4. Francis White : “S.T. P. et Ecclesia; Cathedralis Carleolensis decanus ; aet. 59, 1624.” 
 
 T. Coclcsonus, sc. 4to. — prefixed to his “ Reply to Fisher.” — 4to. G. Mountaine. Granger. 
 Bromley. 
 
 5. Matthew Wren : G. V. Gucht, sc. h. sh.—in Wren’s “ Parentalia,” 1750, fol. There is 
 
 a satyrical Print of him sitting at a table; from his mouth proceed two labels; one of which 
 is inscribed “ Canonical prayers,” the other, “ No afternoon sermons.” On one side stand 
 several clergymen; over who^e heads is written “Altar-cringing priests:” on the other side 
 stand two men, in lay habits; above whom is this inscription: “Churchwardens for articles.” 
 It is prefixed to a pamphlet, entitled “ Wren’s Anatomy; discovering his notorious Pranks, 
 
 Arc. Printed in the Year when Wren ceased to domineer,” 1641, 4to.-From an original 
 
 Miniature, preserved in his Family, A. Van Assen, sc. Published by W. Richardson, 1793. 
 Granger. Bromley. 
 
 6. Joseph Hall : a book in his hand, and a medal of the synod of Dort hanging at his breast: 
 
 prefixed to his “ Funeral Sermon,” 8vo. Faithorne. — J. Payne, sc. h. sh. prefixed to his 
 Sermons,” fol. — copied in 12mo. W.M.Arshall — 12mo. prefixed tohis“Cases of Conscience.” 
 —Queboroen , fol. h. sh.— Prefixed to his “ Works.” He is represented with a book in his 
 hand, mathematical instruments, &c. This Print, which is one of the best of him, was 
 reduced, and bound up with his “Shaking of the Olive Tree,” 1660. 4to. — P. D. Zetter, f. 
 4to.—in “ Boissard ”— T. Cross, sc. 12mo. Granger. Bromley. 
 
 7. Edward Reynolds: a?t. 55, D. Loggan, sc. h. sh. prefixed to his “ Works,” 1658, fol.— 
 
 R. White, sc. 12mo. prefixed to his “ Meditations on St. Peter.” 1677. Granger. Bromley. 
 
 8. William Lloyd: D. Loggan, sc. h. sh.— J. Sturt, fol.—aet. 86, large fol. T. Forster, p. 
 
 Vertue, sc.—set. 87, large fol. F. Weideman, p. Vertue, 1714—“ Bishop of St. Asaph,” oval 
 mez.—in the Print of the Seven Bishops sent to the Tower in 1688—in seven ovals, sold by 
 Loggan, large fol. vr. Banc—large fol. J. Drapentier — large fol. J. Go/e— with the Candle¬ 
 sticks, large 4to. S. Gribe/in —with Dutch verses, Mortier, p. A. llaelweg — mez. J. Oliver 
 ■— mez. Robinson — with the candlesticks, mez. J. Smith, 1688 — fol. J. Sturt —large fol. R. 
 White, 1688—fol. R. White, prefixed to their “Trial.” Granger. Bromley. 
 
 9. John Moore: mez. G. Kneller, p. W. Faithorne. sc. This Plate is in two states: 1. 
 
 Episcopus Norvicencis, sold by Cooper; 2. Altered to Eliensis — Vr. Gucht, sc. prefixed to 
 his “Sermons,” 1714—large fol. ad vivum, R. White. This Plate is in three states: 1. Epis¬ 
 copus Norvicencis; 2. Sold by S. Canvichau ; 3. S. T. P. consecrated Bishop of Norwich, 
 &c. &c. Noble. Bromley. 
 
NORWICH CATHEDRAL:-LIST OF PORTRAITS AND SEALS. 
 
 89 
 
 10. Charles Trimnell : mez. J. Faber, sc. Noble. Bromley. 
 
 11. Sir Thomas Gooch: In his own hair, sitting, mez. T. Hudson, p. M‘Ardell — mez. ad 
 vivum, D. Heins, 1741. Bromley. 
 
 12. George Horne: oval: prefixed to his “Sermons,” and to his “ Life,” by Jones. 
 
 13. James Goldwell: by Thane, 1793. 
 
 14. Richard Corbett: by Harding, 1796. 
 
 15. Anthony Sparrow: by Richardson, 1796. 
 
 16. Henry Bathurst: engraved by IV. C. Edwards, from G. Hayter. 
 
 ENGRAVED PORTRAITS OF THE DEANS OF NORWICH. 
 
 John Sharp : mez. E. Cooper, sc. 1691—mez. F. Kyte, sc.—large fol. ad vivum, R. White , 
 1691— R. White, sc. 8vo. prefixed to his “Sermons,” 1709—8vo. Noble. Bromley. 
 Humphrey Prideaux: oval, E. Seeman, p. J. Hopwood, sc.— Clark, sc. 4to. 1724, and 8vo. 
 1744— E. Seeman, p. G. Vertue, sc. fol.—prefixed to his “Connexion,” 1720, fol.—mez. 4to. 
 E. Seeman, p. Jacob Folkema, sc.—in the Print, with Locke, Burnet, and Clarke. Noble. 
 Bromley. 
 
 SEALS OF THE BISHOPS, DEANERY, 8cc. 
 
 Blomefield published Engravings of the following Seals, with short notices, in his History, &c. 
 of Norwich.—1. Bishop John Salmon’s office Seal, 1300:—2. Bishop Anthony de Beck, 1337 : 
 —3. Prior of Canterbury, as Guardian of the Spiritualities of the See during vacancies :—4. Of 
 the Sacrist’s office, in the Priory:—5. Of the Archdeacon tnd his official:—6. Of the Bishop’s 
 Consistory Court:—7. Of the Abbey of St. Benet, at Holme; of which the bishop is still con¬ 
 tinued abbot: — 8. Archdeacon of Norfolk :—9. Of the Commissary, and of the office of Nor¬ 
 folk of Bishop Walter Sultield.—In Stukeley’s Itinerary, vol. i. is engraved an ancient Seal of the 
 Bishop of Norwich ; and Blomefield also gives another plate of it, from one in the possession of 
 the corporation of Lynn. This is remarkable as displaying on each side, elevations of two ends 
 of a church, with gigantic statues, busts, birds, &c.; and from the following inscription on the 
 edge, which is very uncommon: “Anno domini Millessimo Ducentessimo Quincpiagesimo octavo, 
 factum est hoc sigillum." The Seal of “ Radulphus,” Bishop of Norwich, was engraved by 
 F. Perry. 
 
JList of prints 
 
 ILLUSTRATIVE OF NORWICH CATHEDRAL. 
 
 Plates. 
 
 Subjects. 
 
 Drawn by 
 
 Engraved by 
 
 Inscribed to 
 
 Described 
 
 i. 
 
 Ground Plan, Sites of Tombs, &c. 
 
 Henry Basset 1 
 
 J. Roffe .... 
 
 
 29 
 
 ii. 
 
 View of the West Front. 
 
 F. Mackenzie.. 
 
 W. Kadelyffe 
 
 B. H. Malkin, LL.D. &c. 
 
 31 
 
 hi. 
 
 Section and Plan of Ditto. 
 
 R. Cattermole 
 
 H. Le Keux 
 
 
 32 
 
 IV. 
 
 I Architectural Details, Arches, ] 
 
 
 
 
 ih. 
 
 
 l Capitals, &c.. s 
 
 
 
 
 V. 
 
 Elevation and Section of Nave .. 
 
 R. Cattermole 
 
 J. Roffe .... 
 
 — 
 
 ib. 
 
 VI. 
 
 Tower: View of the Exterior ... 
 
 J. A. Repton.. 
 
 J. Le Keux.. 
 
 
 33 
 
 VII 
 
 1 Tower : View of the Interior, 7 
 
 1 looking N.J 
 
 J. A Repton.. 
 
 H. Le Keux 
 
 Sir Thomas Gage, Bart ... 
 
 34 
 
 VIII. 
 
 
 R. Cattermole 
 
 J. Roffe .... 
 
 
 ib. 
 
 ( Elevation of South Transept X 
 
 
 IX. 
 
 7 and half of Tower. Section f 
 i of North Transept and half / 
 L of Tower. j 
 
 J. A. Repton.. 
 
 Tarrell. 
 
 —- 
 
 ib. 
 
 X. 
 
 View of North Transept. 
 
 F. Mackenzie 
 
 Lewis. 
 
 Maj.-Gen. Sir Jas. Affleck 
 
 35 
 
 XI. 
 
 View of East End, &c. 
 
 R. Cattermole 
 
 Wm. Findlay 
 
 Charles Harvey, Esq. M.P. 
 
 The Dean of Norwich ... 
 
 ib. 
 
 XII. 
 
 View of the Nave, looking East.. 
 
 F. Mackenzie 
 
 ib. 
 
 XIII 
 
 View of the Choir, looking East . 
 
 F. Mackenzie 
 
 J. Le Keux.. 
 
 The Bishop of Norwich.. 
 
 ib. 43 
 
 XIV. 
 
 View of the North Aile of Choir. 
 
 R. Cattermole 
 
 W. Radclyffe 
 
 Rev. James Ford, B. D. .. 
 
 36 
 
 XV. 
 
 ^ Details of Niche, Canopy,) 
 if Panels, &c..'. fj 
 
 R. Cattermole 
 
 H. Le Keux 
 
 — 
 
 ih. 
 
 XVI. 
 
 Goldweli’s Monument . 
 
 F. Mackenzie 
 
 J. Lewis .... 
 
 Pli. M. Martineau, Esq. .. 
 
 34, 36 
 
 XVII. 
 
 
 R. Cattermole 
 
 F. Mackenzie 
 
 
 
 
 XVIII 
 
 S Door-way and Screen between ) 
 
 W. Radclyffe 
 
 Rev. R. Forby. 
 
 SO, 37 
 
 
 t rransept and Aile.. ) 
 
 
 
 XIX. 
 
 East End of South Aile 2 . 
 
 F. Mackenzie 
 
 J. Le Keux.. 
 
 Dawson Turner, Esq. 
 
 37 
 
 XX. 
 
 View of the N. Walk of the Cloister 3 
 
 F. Mackenzie 
 
 J. Scott .... 
 
 Frank Sayers, M. D. 
 
 38 
 
 XXI. 
 
 Details: Caps. Door-way, &c. .. 
 
 R. Cattermole 
 
 J. Roffe .... 
 
 — 
 
 39 
 
 XXII 
 
 Windows and Doors. 
 
 J. A. Repton.. 
 
 F. Mackenzie 
 
 
 
 31, 40 
 
 XXIII 
 
 Erpingham Gate, West View .... 
 
 H. Le Keux 
 
 Wm. Wilkins, Esq. &o. .. 
 
 40, 43 
 
 XXIV 
 
 $ St. Ethelbert’s Gate-house, E. > 
 t and W. Fronts .$ 
 
 R Cattermole 
 
 T. Ranson .. 
 
 
 42 
 
 XXV. 
 
 Door-way from Cloister (on Wood) 
 
 R. Cattermole 
 
 Thompson .. 
 
 
 37 
 
 1 On the accompanying Plate the Engraver has inserted J. instead of Henry Basset. 
 
 2 In representing this part of the church the draftsman has omitted several modern pews, and also a wall behind the font, in order to show 
 The altar-end. 
 
 3 For “ looking West read, looking East. 
 
 END OF THE ACCOUNT OF NORWICH CATHEDRAL. 
 
 THE BINDER is directed to cancel the fourth leaf of the first sheet.